🏛️ Florida's cultivated-meat ban spreads to other ranching states before federal preemption undoes it

⚖ Why this result

fully deterministic — computed from daily closes on the scoring date; nothing below is editable or hand-set

1. Window: 2024-03-15 → 2026-03-15 — first mention + 24-month horizon, then the window locks.
2. The call: ▼ SHORT BYND (primary play). BYND fell 91.1% over the window → return (sign flipped for a SHORT) = +91.1% (the call made money).
3. Benchmark: holding SPY over the same window returned +32.7% → vs SPY = +91.1 − (+32.7) = +58.4% — what this call made or lost against just owning the index. This is the number the result uses.
   Direction-only read: +123.8% — did BYND 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:
   ▶ RIGHT — return ≥ +10% AND beat SPY by 5+ ✓ (return 91.1, vs SPY 58.4)

   · HALF — return ≥ +5% OR beat SPY at all

   · WRONG — everything else
5. Credit: supporters of a RIGHT earn 1.0 each, opposers the opposite — this feeds the scoreboard. supported: Friedberg, Sacks | opposed: Chamath | proxy-sensitive: TSN (long)→PARTIAL (+14.9%)

each voice's total push on the score, in conviction points across every mention — supports and opposes · share = % of all mention-driven movement

Friedberg 42%

3 scoring events · 64% of moves

+66.2 → net +66.2

Chamath 51%

2 scoring events · 21% of moves

+0.0 / -21.6 → net -21.6

Sacks 48%

1 scoring event · 15% of moves

+15.2 → net +15.2

⏳ decay drained -48.9 over the idea's life — that's time passing, attributed to no one