Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Write Simply

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 354 posts

Re: Write Simply

#311

Post by dreamer7 »

PascLeRasc wrote: post #228
dreamer7 wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was hoping you would share your simplified version of the GitHub quote. So let me attempt it instead - "On the evening of March 8, we logged out all users from GitHub.com who had logged in prior to 12:03 UTC on March 8. This was done to protect users from an extremely rare, but potentially serious, security vulnerability affecting a very small number of GitHub.com sessions. No user accounts were affected" I really…

Email from security@github.com, sent on March 9th Last night, we logged out your Github account to fix a security flaw. Your account was not breached. You can read more details here [1]. [1] https://github.blog/2021-03-08-github-security-update-a-bug-...

This is good but without the extra words "extremely rare, potential harm.." this feels like it was a dangerous miss. I would worry about future such occurrences rather than just archiving it. Also I would definitely read more details. So perhaps this message works better in educating users

Re: Write Simply

#312

Post by [deleted] »

a4isms wrote: post #275

I have opinions about writing. So does Mr. Graham. What our opinions have in common is that they are not falsifiable . Unless we validate our conjectures with empirical evidence, we're really just sharing our taste. "Oh no," you may say, "I have tested it, and when I write a longer essay, my retweets and upvotes decline." Very well, but the plural of anecdote is not 'data.' Somewhere else on the Internet, there is so…

[deleted]

Re: Write Simply

#313

Post by keithnz »

keithnz wrote: post #286
thanhhaimai wrote: post #251

Am I the only one not very fond of this style of writing? It's the constant pauses and hiccups that I'm reading. Four paragraphs into it, and I still don't get a lot of information about what the author is trying to convey. In good essays, the first and last sentence in a paragraph are often enough to summarize the points. It helps set the context, and makes it much easier for the reader to make a mental map of the o…

yes, I often find PGs essays too wordy and there's a lot of reading to be done for whatever point/s are being made. I often just start skimming to try and see if I can get to the meat of the essay. This one was actually quite short.

also, hot tip for HNers, though I'm pretty sure this is what a lot of us do anyways, just read the comments first, you tend to get a summary in a few lines on nearly everything that is posted on HN, then you can choose whether you actually want to read the the original post.

Re: Write Simply

#314

Post by zhte415 »

hug wrote: post #273
thanhhaimai wrote: post #251

Am I the only one not very fond of this style of writing? It's the constant pauses and hiccups that I'm reading. Four paragraphs into it, and I still don't get a lot of information about what the author is trying to convey. In good essays, the first and last sentence in a paragraph are often enough to summarize the points. It helps set the context, and makes it much easier for the reader to make a mental map of the o…

> This sentence has five words. Here are five more words. Five-word sentences are fine. But several together become monotonous. Listen to what is happening. The writing is getting boring. The sound of it drones. It’s like a stuck record. The ear demands some variety. Now listen. I vary the sentence length, and I create music. Music. The writing sings. It has a pleasant rhythm, a lilt, a harmony. I use short sentences…

Excellent.

Re: Write Simply

#315

Post by isamuel »

a4isms wrote: post #275

I have opinions about writing. So does Mr. Graham. What our opinions have in common is that they are not falsifiable . Unless we validate our conjectures with empirical evidence, we're really just sharing our taste. "Oh no," you may say, "I have tested it, and when I write a longer essay, my retweets and upvotes decline." Very well, but the plural of anecdote is not 'data.' Somewhere else on the Internet, there is so…

There is no empirical evidence that can "validate" a normative claim, except to the extent that such claims rely on empirical priors. You can't squeeze an "ought" from an "is," literally by definition.

The response "this normative opinion is not falsifiable" is just confused—it's like saying "this empirical observation is not good."

Re: Write Simply

#316

Post by zhte415 »

lelanthran wrote: post #181
davidivadavid wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because James Joyce's style isn't "simple" by any stretch of the imagination, I would guess? And the essay presents its position as a general statement void of all context. What context are we supposed to assume here?

> And the essay presents its position as a general statement void of all context. Are you sure? From the blog (first sentence): > I try to write using ordinary words and simple sentences. Since the "I" in this case refers to someone who does not write poetry, speculative fiction, drama, tragedies, comedies ... and only ever writes for a technical audience, the context is clear: technical[1] audience not seeking poetr…

What is an 'ordinary' word? The first sentence threw me for this precise term, which was internally inconsistent with later in the article talking about second or third+ English language users, or even, not mentioned in the article, first language speakers with differing backgrounds.

A very odd term to use.

I'd open simply with "Think of your audience, think of your goal" and on thinking of audience expand to "Think of your audience, of which there may be some you've not thought of, or it might just be yourself, and think of your goal, if any."

Re: Write Simply

#317

Post by voidhorse »

hourislate wrote: post #32
voidhorse wrote: post #9

“Easy reading is damn hard writing.“ — Nathaniel Hawthorne (apparently)* There’s definite value to simplicity in writing. At the same time, like all principles, people tend to run with the idea and misapply it. There are some cases in which your work demands a certain level of precision that’s only possible using complex words or jargon. Not to mention, writing that’s a little complicated can be a lot more fun! There…

Reading that paragraph, 20-30 percent could be removed. Reading for pleasure should be entertaining. Reading for knowledge should be simple/concise.

An, but there’s a fine line between simplification and reductionism.

For instance, your condensation of the graph completely misses the mention that people misapply general principles, and it also reduced linguistic creativity to “entertainment” which can mean a far different thing (e.g. one can write a book that’s wildly entertaining because of its characters but that sports none of the linguistic ingenuity I mention in the OP). Not to mention, you couldn’t even decide whether to use the word simple or concise! Sometimes you just can’t get around using a couple of “extra” words. Thus the abominable “/“. (Ick)

Re: Write Simply

#319

Post by a1369209993 »

keiferski wrote: post #84
cousin_it wrote: post #77

When something feels easy to read, it's not just a matter of using simple words. To maximize scanability, you need to use a mix of long and short words, and also mix long and short sentences, until you achieve a kind of "flow". Famously, Dovlatov's prose (in Russian) avoids having words that start with the same letter in the same sentence, which is unnoticeable to the reader but makes the words just fly off the page.…

Was the Emperor written, or was it the biography? You skipped the first half of my sentence, which makes it pretty clear who wrote the book. At least, I think it does. In any case, you did make me realize the last clause is awkwardly written, so thanks! I amended my original comment.

> > Was the Emperor written, or was it the biography?

Based on the other examples, I think they meant, at the point where you have up to "written", do you expect the sentence to continue as above, or as something like:

> I had this impression recently while reading the Akbarnama, which is a sort of court-approved biography of the Mughal Emperor Akbar, [who was] written as the greatest leader the Mughal empire ever had.

Although if so, I don't think that one's a very good example, as suggested by the need to editorialize in the "[who was]" above.

Re: Write Simply

#320

Post by keiferski »

randomsearch wrote: post #261
keiferski wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the parent poster, but: think of speed bumps. They force you to slow down and pay more attention to the road. Some writers, particularly post-modern ones, aim at the same thing. By forcing you to read their works carefully, you'll (in theory) be forced to think about them more.

That feels like the author is saying “I’m so clever you need to be told when to think about this,” whereas i would prefer to think at my own pace, without deliberate obfuscation, thanks very much. If it’s a work of art, fair enough. If you’re trying to explain or argue something... then you’re probably hiding the holes in your argument or trying to sound smarter than you are.

...it’s not my reasoning. I’m explaining why some postmodern writers say they have that style. Personally I think it can be hit or miss.
Post reply on HN