If you are betting on the California wildfires, I don’t know what to tell you. Go outside (if it’s safe). Do some reflecting. Call a gambling-addiction hotline, probably. Though I suppose the impulse to wager on destruction isn’t all bettors’ fault — gambling companies have people right where they want them, placing wagers on things most of us never would have imagined just a few years ago. We’re days into the new year, and it already feels like the gambling boom has gone too far.

In case you missed it, the prediction market Polymarket is letting people place bets on aspects of the fires that have ravaged the Los Angeles area. The platform set various markets for questions like how long it would take the first fire to be contained, how fast the various blazes would burn, and where they would spread.

The cryptocurrency-based market — which is off-limits for American gamblers, though some try to circumvent it with a VPN — seemed to recognize that this might not go over well. In a disclaimer on the site, Polymarket says the point of its prediction markets is to “harness the wisdom of the crowd to create accurate, unbiased forecasts for the most important events impacting society.” The “devastating” fires were one such event in which Polymarket said it could “yield invaluable real-time answers to those directly impacted in ways traditional media cannot.” In other words, if you want to know whether your house is about to burn down, check what a group of anonymous gamblers outside the US think — hopefully in addition to the news and local authorities and, you know, your own eyes.

The idea of bettors trying to make a quick buck when lives and livelihoods are at stake is morally fraught. It’s also a sign of the times: Gambling is becoming increasingly common, and in the process, the lines around what’s appropriate, logical, and ethical are becoming increasingly murky. If 2024 was the year we asked whether gambling culture in the US had gone too far, 2025 might be the year we get an answer.

It’s tempting to look down on gamblers who take things too far, depending on your tolerance for that kind of stuff. But the problem with blaming individuals for getting in over their heads is that you miss the forest for the trees. Betting platforms and the gambling industry are designed to suck customers in and get them to bet at higher rates and in different ways.

While Polymarket may be operating in a bit of a gray area, even the formal, highly regulated platforms in the US are enticing people to develop a deeper relationship with betting. Businesses want to cross-sell — once Caesars gets you into its sports-betting pipeline, it would very much like to direct you to the casino. DraftKings is launching a subscription service that draws in bettors with the possibility of making extra money on super-long-shot bets. Delta Air Lines also recently announced a partnership with the sportsbook that could integrate its offerings or its branding into the gaming options on airplane seatbacks, though the details are vague. These innovations don’t rival something as clearly problematic as betting on fires, but they show that gambling companies are succeeding at getting into more nooks and crannies of society.

In a statement to Business Insider, a DraftKings spokesperson said that the sports betting industry is “rigorously regulated” and that the company operates in “strict compliance” with the regulations of every jurisdiction it’s in. “Equating DraftKings with unregulated prediction markets — particularly those that fall outside the scope of US regulation — is not only an egregious misrepresentation but also an insult to the integrity of regulators and responsible, law-abiding operators,” the spokesperson said.

If 2024 was the year we asked whether gambling culture in the US had gone too far, 2025 might be the year we get an answer.

It’s impossible to ignore the recent cultural shift when it comes to gambling. After decades of operating in the shadows, sports gambling is everywhere: Americans are thought to have wagered some $150 billion on sports in 2024, up from about $120 billion in 2023, and ads for gambling are almost inescapable during sporting events in many parts of the country. Beyond sports, some operators, including Robinhood, offer betting on things like elections. Polymarket’s bread and butter may be elections, but it’s also letting people wager on whether we’ll see a new pandemic in 2025 or whether Israel and Hamas will agree to a cease-fire. People are even treating areas that are nominally not gambling, like the stock market, crypto, and even restaurant reservations, as if they’re a casino. However you feel about gambling — maybe you’re OK with it, maybe you think it’s evil — the speed with which the lines around it are moving can make your head spin.

A spokesperson for Polymarket told me that the company didn’t generate fees or revenue from the fire-related markets (or any of its markets) and described the markets as “a way to distinguish the signal from the noise in a news environment starved of quantitative data.” They added: “These markets address the same questions being discussed across all of cable news and X. We’ve proven that markets can be an invaluable alternative information source for those seeking real-time quantitative data.”

The fire-related markets are small — the largest one, about how many acres will burn, had about $275,000 in it on Friday afternoon. For comparison, more than $400 million has been bet on who will be inaugurated as US president on January 20. Why do this at all then? The smaller the prediction market, meaning the less money bet on it, the less the wisdom-of-the-crowd idea holds. That flies in the face of the argument that this is some noble endeavor to get information — it’s just a handful of incredibly online gawkers betting on the outcome of an event that is devastating for thousands of people.

Just how far do we want gambling to go?

The pervasiveness of betting — both in what you can gamble on and where you can gamble — is changing our relationship with it. In a 2024 survey of US adults by the American Gaming Association, 55% of respondents said they had participated in some sort of gambling over the past year, up from 49% the year before. And Gallup surveys suggest a healthy majority of Americans see gambling as morally acceptable. At the extreme, the gambling industry envisions a future where people will bet on everything and will be able to create markets for anything. Perhaps someday you’ll be able to create a mini-market for people to bet on whether it will rain on your wedding day. On the one hand, whatever, maybe that’s just an extra bit of fun to make the day more exciting. On the other hand, you could just check the weather and otherwise enjoy your wedding without making it into a money-making event for random people on the internet. Plenty of people are able to enjoy watching sports sans gambling as well, even as the sportsbooks spend a lot of money to convince people that betting really ups the fun quotient.

There are going to be a lot of “tipping point” moments for gambling in the months and years to come. For a lot of people, betting is a newfangled way to find some enjoyment and spice up life. But finding where the boundaries are — socially and legally — is a critical process where there aren’t easy, straightforward answers. When we can bet on more and more things in more and more places, it’s fair to ask: Just how far do we want gambling to go?

Emily Stewart is a senior correspondent at Business Insider, writing about business and the economy.