Even if it's predictable the opaqueness of the earth crust makes predictive models hard

Really I suspect that's the only hard part. If we had accurate 3d models of the structure (well 4d, 3d models over time) it would probably be reasonably easy to estimate how much strain it can take, and how much strain there is... Maybe not predict-to-the-second levels of detail but at least to predict that a quake we see is likely to be a precursor to a much larger one or is likely that peak.

But getting that data seems... practically impossible at our current tech level.

▲

mhurron an hour ago | parent [-]

> at least to predict that a quake we see is likely to be a precursor to a much larger one or is likely that peak.

That we can basically do. "Observations show that the chance of an earthquake being followed by a larger one nearby and within a week is about 5%."

https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-probability-earthquake-a-fore...

It is an incredibly safe bet that any earthquake is not the sign of a larger one.

	▲	gpm an hour ago \| parent [-]
		5% within a week is a very high set of odds for such rare events. Or to look at it from the other more relevant direction 70% of magnitude 7 or larger quakes have detected foreshocks... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreshock