Live data from Hacker News

Good Writing

paulgraham.com

131–140 of 345 posts

Re: Good Writing

#131
post #40

Reading Graham's essays on writing always puts me in mind of the videos where Mexican moms react to Rachael Ray trying to cook ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFN2g1FBgVA ), or a Malaysian guy has to watch a BBC cook make rice ( https://youtu.be/53me-ICi_f8?si=0AaZ82dk_AYFqJAx&t=226 ).

He carries the self-confidence that billions of dollars in wealth can give you.

[flagged]

Re: Good Writing

#132
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He carries the self-confidence that billions of dollars in wealth can give you.

[flagged]

> ... he writes mostly to justify his luck in amassing capital as something of intellectual consequence.

Strange take, given PG made his billions from actually building something of immense consequence (YC) & provably codifying a blueprint on building fast-growing companies in SV.

If PG was a prof at HBS, it is likely he'd be considered in the same bracket as Clayton Christensen.

Re: Good Writing

#133
post #40

Reading Graham's essays on writing always puts me in mind of the videos where Mexican moms react to Rachael Ray trying to cook ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFN2g1FBgVA ), or a Malaysian guy has to watch a BBC cook make rice ( https://youtu.be/53me-ICi_f8?si=0AaZ82dk_AYFqJAx&t=226 ).

He carries the self-confidence that billions of dollars in wealth can give you.

It's really the self-confidence of a successful person. He doesn't need to prove anything to anyone at this point, so he's unafraid of criticism. There was another submission here recently ("Find Your People") that touched on that: be immune to rejection.

Re: Good Writing

#134

...I find it a bit surprising that Paul Graham of all people, writing in May of 2025, managed to get through this entire essay without mentioning LLMs. Because I think LLMs provide a clear counterexample to his thesis. They are quite good at the craft of writing--not perfect, but probably much better than the median human--and they are just as good when the content is true as when it's false. This quality ruins a lot…

> LLMs are so good at bullshitting

They are trained on it.

Re: Good Writing

#135
post #130

In french we have this very old expression : "ce qui se conçoit bien s'énonce clairement". "what is well understood will be clearly phrased". It's been consistently used by parents and teachers since the 17th century, so i guess there must be some truth to it.

Lacan developed the idea of "deferred understanding" in his clinical practice and (infamously) deployed it in his teaching as well. It sounds a little suspicious at first, but it's not difficult to grasp what it is or why it might be beneficial in certain contexts where repression is faced. For example, it's a cliche on the left that far more people like the idea of socialism when it's described to them piecemeal without being labeled as such than would be willing to endorse "socialism" by name. Drawing out that tacit endorsement is a matter of "deferring understanding"--bypassing someone's resistance to an idea they don't understand well, but nevertheless have strong feelings about, by introducing them to it in a somewhat confusing way, so that they come to understand it better before they realize what exactly it is that they're coming to understand. In Lacan's approach understanding is a specific process with its own benefits and drawbacks, rather than the universal purpose of all communication, nor beneficial for every purpose communication might be engaged in to pursue. Confusing writing is like the proverbial knife that can be used to injure or, in the hands of a surgeon, to heal. This is why art students sometimes practice drawing images that have been turned upside down, so that they can focus on the details that are there in front of their eyes without being distracted by their own comprehension standing in for the colors and shapes actually present: "this is an image of a cow and I know what a cow is supposed to look like, so once I have recognized that it is a cow, there is no longer any need to keep looking." One of the big leaps that art students make is in learning to rigorously look at what they're drawing beyond merely seeing and recognizing what it is, which is the usual everyday way of looking. In the same way Lacan taught his students to rigorously listen to their patients and all the little oddities in the way they describe their problems that might otherwise be dismissed out of hand by a less attentive doctor who too quickly decides they know what is going on. This way they might avoid being fooled by their own understanding before they've had a chance to engage with the irreducible complexity and uniqueness of this or that specific neurosis. Understanding is not always the right tool for the job, or at least not the right tool for every step of every communicative job.

Re: Good Writing

#136
> I think writing that sounds good is more likely to be right.

This is a wild belief to hold in the post truth age of bs generation machines.

Re: Good Writing

#139
post #130

In french we have this very old expression : "ce qui se conçoit bien s'énonce clairement". "what is well understood will be clearly phrased". It's been consistently used by parents and teachers since the 17th century, so i guess there must be some truth to it.

Isn't that the same thing as the oft-repeated "if you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough", which is a saying I really, really, really dislike a lot, because understanding is one thing, and transferring that understanding is a skill unto its own.
Post reply on HN