Spotify Confirms Streaming Fraud After Kalshi Trader Cries Foul
Spotify Confirms Streaming Fraud After Kalshi Trader Cries Foul
Spotify 确认存在流媒体欺诈，此前 Kalshi 交易员提出质疑
Top Kalshi trader Caleb Davies usually speaks to the press about how prediction markets help him rake in money. The Minneapolis-based IT worker estimates he’s made $1.2 million overall across different prediction platforms, with $414,000 in winnings from Kalshi’s culture markets alone. He especially enjoys wagering on music charts, because he carefully analyzes Spotify data to pick winners. “Every single morning, I’m going in, downloading the data, and updating my projections,” he tells WIRED.
顶级 Kalshi 交易员 Caleb Davies 通常会向媒体讲述预测市场如何帮助他赚取利润。这位居住在明尼阿波利斯的 IT 工作者估计，他在不同的预测平台上总共赚取了 120 万美元，其中仅在 Kalshi 的文化市场中就赢得了 41.4 万美元。他特别喜欢在音乐排行榜上进行投注，因为他会仔细分析 Spotify 的数据来挑选赢家。“每天早上，我都会登录、下载数据并更新我的预测，”他告诉《连线》（WIRED）杂志。
This summer, though, he’s become increasingly agitated about what he claims is an obvious, bot-fueled effort to manipulate Spotify-related markets. He recently began compiling and publishing evidence for his theory, eventually becoming so convinced that he contacted Spotify, Kalshi, and Polymarket with his concerns.
然而，今年夏天，他对于所谓的“由机器人驱动的操纵 Spotify 相关市场的明显企图”感到越来越不安。他最近开始整理并发布支持其理论的证据，最终因深信不疑而联系了 Spotify、Kalshi 和 Polymarket，表达了他的担忧。
This week, the situation hit a boiling point when the song “Earrings” by Malcolm Todd surged to number one on a Spotify chart. In a series of X posts, Davies outlined his suspected culprit: “botting,” or scammers who purchase bots to juice streaming numbers. Davies argued that prediction market traders were botting the charts to influence the outcome of related events contracts. Todd’s song was such an underdog that it wasn’t even listed as an option on Polymarket: “Looking at the dataset of Sunday to Monday changes, it was a 11.24 sigma event, or a roughly 1 in 77 octillion chance of happening randomly,” Davies wrote.
本周，当 Malcolm Todd 的歌曲《Earrings》飙升至 Spotify 排行榜第一名时，局势达到了沸点。在一系列 X（原推特）帖子中，Davies 指出了他怀疑的罪魁祸首：“刷量机器人”（botting），即诈骗者购买机器人来虚增流媒体播放量。Davies 认为，预测市场的交易员正在利用机器人操纵排行榜，以影响相关事件合约的结果。Todd 的这首歌在 Polymarket 上甚至没有被列为选项，属于极冷门的黑马：“查看从周日到周一的数据变化，这是一个 11.24 西格玛事件，随机发生的概率大约为 77 秭分之一（1 in 77 octillion），”Davies 写道。
It turns out that he was on to something. Spotify confirmed to WIRED that it investigated suspected manipulation incidents Davies flagged and found evidence of artificial streaming. “All streaming services face ever-changing stream manipulation. Spotify has best-in-class detection and mitigation practices for manipulated streams, and we don’t pay out associated royalties,” spokesperson Laura Batey says. (The company didn’t offer any explanation for the manipulation, however, so Davies’ theory that it was directly tied to a scheme to manipulate prediction markets remains just that.)
事实证明，他的怀疑是有根据的。Spotify 向《连线》证实，他们调查了 Davies 标记的疑似操纵事件，并发现了人为刷量的证据。发言人 Laura Batey 表示：“所有流媒体服务都面临着不断变化的流媒体操纵问题。Spotify 拥有业内领先的检测和缓解操纵流媒体的实践，我们不会支付相关的版税。”（不过，该公司并未对操纵行为做出任何解释，因此 Davies 关于此事直接与操纵预测市场的计划挂钩的理论目前仍仅是猜测。）
Spotify ultimately adjusted its charts to account for the discrepancy, culling over 500,000 artificial streams, which bumped Todd’s song from first to fourth. The process was not immediate, though, and Kalshi had already resolved the market to award traders who selected Todd’s song.
Spotify 最终调整了排行榜以纠正这一偏差，剔除了超过 50 万次的人为播放量，这使得 Todd 的歌曲从第一名跌至第四名。然而，这一过程并非即时完成，而 Kalshi 此前已经结算了市场，并向选择了 Todd 歌曲的交易员发放了奖金。
“We’re in touch with Spotify and are actively investigating this matter,” Kalshi spokesperson Elisabeth Diana tells WIRED. Those conversations did prompt a more immediate change: At the Swedish streaming giant’s request, Kalshi removed Spotify’s logo from its markets that relate to the company, and adjusted language that initially suggested Spotify had verified chart results.
“我们正在与 Spotify 保持联系，并积极调查此事，”Kalshi 发言人 Elisabeth Diana 告诉《连线》。这些沟通确实促成了一些更直接的改变：应这家瑞典流媒体巨头的要求，Kalshi 从其与该公司相关的市场中删除了 Spotify 的标志，并调整了最初暗示 Spotify 已验证排行榜结果的措辞。
When Davies first reached out to Kalshi with concerns, the company’s head of enforcement Robert DeNault told the trader that only Spotify would be able to definitively confirm whether it had been botted, and noted that there could be non-suspicious reasons for the uptick. DeNault also floated a theory that Kalshi traders could be merely copying what peers were doing on Polymarket.
当 Davies 最初就其担忧联系 Kalshi 时，该公司的执法主管 Robert DeNault 告诉这位交易员，只有 Spotify 才能最终确认是否存在机器人刷量，并指出播放量激增可能存在非可疑原因。DeNault 还提出了一个理论，即 Kalshi 的交易员可能只是在模仿 Polymarket 上同行的做法。
“Nobody from Polymarket profited from the fraud. That’s what undermines Kalshi’s argument, because they didn’t have a Malcom Todd bracket,” Davies tells WIRED.
“Polymarket 上没有人从这次欺诈中获利。这正是削弱 Kalshi 论点的地方，因为他们根本没有 Malcolm Todd 这个选项，”Davies 告诉《连线》。
Polymarket refutes this theory as well. “It’s actually not plausible since we didn’t even have Malcolm Todd as an option on this Spotify market,” said spokesperson Annabel Walsh. The company confirmed it’s reviewing the broader streaming manipulation situation, but hasn’t identified any immediate manipulation thus far.
Polymarket 也反驳了这一理论。发言人 Annabel Walsh 表示：“这实际上是不可能的，因为我们在这个 Spotify 市场上甚至没有将 Malcolm Todd 列为选项。”该公司确认正在审查更广泛的流媒体操纵情况，但目前尚未发现任何直接的操纵行为。
No one has spoken with the people or group of people behind the streaming manipulation, so their motivations remain unclear. (Todd did not respond to requests for comment, but there’s nothing to suggest he’s anything more than an innocent bystander.)
目前还没有人与流媒体操纵背后的个人或团体进行过交谈，因此他们的动机尚不清楚。（Todd 没有回应置评请求，但没有任何迹象表明他不仅仅是一个无辜的旁观者。）
What is clear is that this type of market introduces a new incentive for streaming fraudsters. This year, several high-profile arrests have been made related to alleged insider trading schemes on Polymarket, though none have been tied to streaming charts.
显而易见的是，这种类型的市场为流媒体欺诈者带来了新的动机。今年，已有几起与 Polymarket 上涉嫌内幕交易计划相关的高调逮捕事件，尽管目前还没有任何一起与流媒体排行榜挂钩。
“The platforms are not supposed to list contracts at all, unless they make an affirmative determination that they are not readily susceptible to manipulation. It is clear that in this market, and many other markets, they are not doing that,” says Amanda Fischer, a former Securities and Exchange Commission chief of staff and the policy director and chief operating officer of the Wall Street watchdog nonprofit Better Markets. “They’re obviously readily susceptible to manipulation.”
“除非平台能够明确认定合约不易受到操纵，否则它们根本不应该上架这些合约。很明显，在这个市场以及许多其他市场中，他们并没有做到这一点，”前美国证券交易委员会幕僚长、华尔街监管非营利组织 Better Markets 的政策总监兼首席运营官 Amanda Fischer 表示，“它们显然极易受到操纵。”
As for Davies, for now, he’s swearing off chart-based markets. “They’ve been a big gainer for me historically, but I can’t play it anymore,” he says.
至于 Davies，目前他发誓不再参与基于排行榜的市场。“从历史上看，它们曾是我获利丰厚的来源，但我现在不能再玩了，”他说。