On one hand, It seems quite plausible for forecasts like this to usually be underconfident about the likelihood of the null event, but on the other hand recent events should probably have substantially increased forecasters’ entropy for questions around geopolitical events in the next few days and weeks.
To me it seems that potential nuclear war is a lot more concerning than proximal country invasion as it would escalate much more slowly.
While it might be excessive I’m more worried about status-quo bias. Most of us haven’t experienced a serious war and will be overly focused on how good and safe things seem now plus the highly inconvenient short-term personal implications.
What do you put P(nukes used | Russia-NATO conflict)? Intuitively it seems high to me. There hasn’t been a direct conflict between them yet; basically down to MAD.
Miscalibration might cut both ways…
On one hand, It seems quite plausible for forecasts like this to usually be underconfident about the likelihood of the null event, but on the other hand recent events should probably have substantially increased forecasters’ entropy for questions around geopolitical events in the next few days and weeks.
To me it seems that potential nuclear war is a lot more concerning than proximal country invasion as it would escalate much more slowly.
While it might be excessive I’m more worried about status-quo bias. Most of us haven’t experienced a serious war and will be overly focused on how good and safe things seem now plus the highly inconvenient short-term personal implications.
What do you put P(nukes used | Russia-NATO conflict)? Intuitively it seems high to me. There hasn’t been a direct conflict between them yet; basically down to MAD.