\n
<\/p>\n
But its primary rival, Polymarket, has taken a different approach. A spokesperson for Polymarket told Ars in an emailed statement that the company does not \u201cprofit from outcomes,\u201d adding that people \u201ccome to Polymarket for information.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWhile we are not blind to the risks, removing these markets does not prevent a tragedy but makes the most accurate information less accessible to the people who need it most,\u201d he wrote.<\/p>\n
In the same email, the spokesperson also noted \u201con background\u201d\u2014a condition to which Ars did not agree\u2014that \u201cPolymarket does not currently have any markets on wildfires and has not for some time.\u201d<\/p>\n
The spokesperson declined to respond to Ars\u2019 follow-up questions about whether Polymarket was claiming that, by definition, it provides \u201cthe most accurate information\u201d to people experiencing a wildfire.<\/p>\n
For their part, wildfire experts say that they are appalled by the mere existence of prediction markets that allow for trading on these disasters.<\/p>\n
\u201c[Such markets] could create a perverse incentive for arson or other destructive activities,\u201d Michael Gollner, a professor at the UC Berkeley Fire Research Lab, emailed Ars. \u201cWe should not focus our energy on monetizing the outcome of devastating natural disasters. Instead, we should focus our efforts on mitigating these events with targeting investments before they start so that our communities can become more resilient.\u201d<\/p>\n
Riva Duncan, the president of Grassroots Wildland Firefighters, a nonprofit organization made up of current and former federal wildland firefighters, said her community is \u201cpretty disgusted\u201d by these betting markets.<\/p>\n
\u201cTo think there are people hoping to make money off tragedy is beyond comprehension,\u201d she emailed Ars. \u201cThey should ask some of the folks in Spokane who just lost their homes how they feel about it.\u201d<\/p>\n