📈 Telcos go back to being dumb pipes — and that's a bad business

⚖ Why this verdict

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

1. Window: 2021-05-31 → 2022-05-31 — first mention + 12-month horizon, then the window locks.
2. The call: ▼ SHORT T (primary play). T rose 5.3% over the window → direction-adjusted R = -5.3% (the call lost money).
3. Benchmark: holding SPY over the same window returned -0.3% → α = -5.3 − (-0.3) = -5.0% — what this call made or lost against just owning the index. This is the number the verdict uses.
   Stock-selection read: -5.6% — did T move the predicted way relative to the market. The two only differ on a SHORT: this call beat the index outright.
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: Friedberg | proxy-sensitive: VZ→PARTIAL (+4.6%)

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

Sacks w=0.89

1 scoring event · 58% of moves

+31.0 → net +31.0

Chamath w=0.84

1 scoring event · 27% of moves

+14.6 → net +14.6

Friedberg w=0.87

1 scoring event · 15% of moves

+0.0 / -8.3 → net -8.3

⏳ decay drained -31.5 over the idea's life — that's time passing, attributed to no one