Depends on the fine print of the contract I imagine. “Spread” for instance could be interpreted to only meaning naturally spread. I would argue that if a fire spreads by arson, it isn’t the same fire spreading to a new area, but an entirely new fire being formed.
The simpler answer is that stock markets are way older than prediction markets and yet it’s not often that you hear about people blowing up factories or murdering people for the sole purpose of manipulating a stock. Similarly, few people would in fact go and help a wildfire spread in order to make money on a YES prediction.
Depends on the fine print of the contract I imagine. “Spread” for instance could be interpreted to only meaning naturally spread. I would argue that if a fire spreads by arson, it isn’t the same fire spreading to a new area, but an entirely new fire being formed.
Thats just incentive to try to make it seem natural. I doubt theres much arson investigation going on atm anyway.
The simpler answer is that stock markets are way older than prediction markets and yet it’s not often that you hear about people blowing up factories or murdering people for the sole purpose of manipulating a stock. Similarly, few people would in fact go and help a wildfire spread in order to make money on a YES prediction.