I thought it was established beyond doubt now that because of 'quantum indeterminacy' and the nature of chaotic systems, that a linear cause and effect sequence cannot be predicted for complex systems. Some things are likely to happen and some things not, but unpredictable events can occur which completely change the situation. That quote from the Stanford Encyc seems to support that idea.
A Buddhist analysis of determinism from the Mahayana viewpoint: Phenomena can be analysed on three levels. First there are existing objects of perception, like cart, forest, object, individual, and so on. (Unenlightened) people generally sieze upon these objects of perception by mistakenly believing that they have real, independent existence (when in fact they have no real essence or independent existence other than their designated and constructed nature). This is how attachment gives rise to consequences (i.e. this is the sense in which the future becomes determined by actions, due to clinging to objects of perception which have no substance, because of ignorance, which drives intentional actions, which creates karma, which determines your existence).
The second level of analysis is that which understands the subtle constituent elements (such as the five skandhas
, or constituents of being, including sense perception, conceptual construction, habitual energies, name-and-form, etc, as described by the Abhidharma.) This is a deeper level of analysis of the true nature of sensory objects but when seen with the 'wisdom-eye', these constituents too are known to be empty (sunya) (i.e. so that it is a relatively more subtle level of perception but still creates karma albeit of a more subtle nature).
The final level of understanding is that of the sage who realises the truly unconditioned nature of reality. It is said that the ultimate reality has no specific character and is therefore indeterminate
. However it is not something ultimately separate from the realm of the determinate either. The ultimate nature is not something that exists, as distinct from all the individual existences; rather it is the final truth about the way in which things themselves exist.
As an individual, one is different from another; this is the mundane truth where distinctions are essential. But in the ultimate truth, with respect to the ultimate nature, the individuals are not different; for the ultimate nature of one is itself the ultimate nature of all.
, K. Venkata Ramanan, Motilal Banarsadis, 1974, Pp 96-97, 216-217.
The upshot is that your future is indeed determined, but only insofar as you sieze upon, and identify with, things, conditions and situations as sources of fulfilment. The nature of ignorance (avidya) and clinging must be penetrated and dispersed by wisdom (prajna) which is liberation from the cycle of birth-and-death (= the realm where determism is operative).