A user cannot downvote a comment that’s directly in reply to their own.
It was likely other user(s) who downvoted a comment that they perceived as low-effort and adding little to the discussion, which I could easily see if the entire comment was something like “Such as?”
I see, thanks. FWIW I was succinct because I didn't think a comment to the effect of "I prefer to let AI do my thinking for me" merited a substantive response. I was (and still am) also genuinely curious what these 3-5 examples were. South Korean chaebols? Roman latifundia? Perhaps we'll never know
I mean... You could always ChatGPT it yourself, could you not? Your ability to find information around this doesn't appear to be hampered by anything other than your imagination.
I would be curious as to what your prompt ends up being (and the reply obviously) if you choose to do so.
I think my prompt and the response I get would be likely to just reflect my own biases (leftist, anti-monopoly etc), which IMO wouldn't add any more to the discussion than did my own annoyance at being downvoted, lol. I think history is so full of examples of top-heavy economies succumbing to stagnation and collapse, it almost doesn't bear mentioning any. Likewise, I think that someone with opposite opinions could get an opposite answer from a sycophantic LLM, and both of us hiding behind LLMs merely obfuscates the debate.
That is to say, I was hoping to get an elaboration of the implicit critique in the comment I originally replied to, since that person seemed so upset that they must have had a profound disagreement with the premise in the article, rather than just being upset that the author didn't seem to have used AI. I suspect they don't want to reply because they know any examples of "strong economies" where the gains were monopolized by a few key players can be easily countered with the story of how those economies subsequently entered a terminal decline, and/or relied on state subsidies to survive. It would also be self-defeating for me to consult AI since I disdain that person's apparent sentiment that we should always default to LLMs instead of having human discussions, considering evidence on our own and reaching our own conclusions.
It was likely other user(s) who downvoted a comment that they perceived as low-effort and adding little to the discussion, which I could easily see if the entire comment was something like “Such as?”