🤖 Smartphone manufacturers slow as consumers skip generations

⚖ Why this verdict

fully deterministic — evaluate.py replays this from daily closes; nothing below is editable or hand-set

1. Window: 2024-01-06 → 2025-01-06 — first mention + 12-month horizon, then the window locks.
2. The call: ▼ SHORT AAPL (primary play). AAPL rose 32.7% over the window → direction-adjusted R = -32.7% (the call lost money).
3. Benchmark: holding SPY over the same window returned +27.1% → α = -32.7 − (+27.1) = -59.7% — what this call made or lost against just owning the index. This is the number the verdict uses.
   Stock-selection read: -5.6% — did AAPL move the predicted way relative to the market. The two only differ on a SHORT: this call was right about direction relative to the index but still cost money versus holding it.
4. Rule fired:
   · HIT — R ≥ +10% AND α ≥ +5

   · PARTIAL — R ≥ +5% OR α ≥ 0

   ▶ MISS — everything else
5. Credit: supporters of a MISS earn 0 each, opposers the inverse — this feeds the scoreboard weights. supported: Chamath, Sacks | opposed: Jason

each voice's total force on the score — supports and opposes from every mention, weighted exactly as the replay applied them · share = % of all mention-driven movement

Jason w=1.05

3 scoring events · 67% of moves

+55.3 / -37.7 → net +17.7

Chamath w=0.90

4 scoring events · 28% of moves

+38.9 → net +38.9

Sacks w=0.77

1 scoring event · 6% of moves

+7.9 → net +7.9

⏳ decay drained -45.5 over the idea's life — that's time passing, attributed to no one