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

Write simply (2021)

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 182 posts

Re: Write simply (2021)

#171

Post by daveslash »

daveslash wrote: post #103
dang wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That joke spoils itself by adding "trick". But if it didn't, then it wouldn't work, since "Why use many words when few will do" is perfectly grammatical.

Dang

The joke was that I was acknowledging the point "that the joke spoils itself by adding "trick"", was acknowledging the point with a single word, and that single word was simply the username of the user who pointed out that the joke ruins itself - thus, reusing a word already in the thread instead of introducing a new word. Guess I took the "why use many word when few word do" too far!

Re: Write simply (2021)

#172

Post by niyikiza »

wilsonnb3 wrote: post #17

I get that this guy is like rich and famous and founded this website or something so people always post his stuff here but his writing always has this weird veneer of pseudo intellectual philosophy that I find very off putting.

You may benefit from his other essay on how to disagree: http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html

Re: Write simply (2021)

#173

Post by dang »

raincole wrote: post #168
dang wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right, the moment one uses language one is full of other-peopleness. But there's still a big difference between thinking for oneself (and claiming the right to think for oneself, which most of us won't) and not daring to. And also: not having the energy to. I mostly don't do it because I'm too lazy. Cowardice too, but laziness is more pleasant to admit to. You're wrong about "position as a wealthy VC". As I sa…

It's very weird that you kept emphasizing "PG was like that before he got rich." You mentioned this point in both of your comments, but the ones you replied to didn't imply PG became like that after he got rich. None of them did. Straw-manning is a telling sigh that you got defensive about PG, for some reason.

Interesting! but I'm not sure I follow. The GP, for example, connected PG's writing style with his "position as a wealthy VC". Pointing out that the writing style predates that seems relevant. No?

If people just dislike wealth, that's one thing, but nowadays they bring that up while criticizing his writing. I don't think those two things are connected, and it seems weird to conflate them.

Re: Write simply (2021)

#174

Post by borroka »

daveslash wrote: post #89
paulpauper wrote: post #10

This may be good advice for an instruction manual or children's books, but I think good prose is something of an art in and of itself. Some of the most successful writers do the opposite. Look at the articles that go viral ..you see that the prose is varied and even complicated, not just simple. The best prose is that which conveys the intended message for the intended audience in the best way possible. I think it's…

" Why use many word, when few word do trick. " ~Kevin Malone, The Office. I agree with you.The point of language is to get an idea from my head into your head with as little loss-of-signal as possible. That is much more challenging than it might sound. Note: an idea might be an emotion. If I were to write that as simply as possible , I might say: "Yes. Talk is communication. That is hard" , or even more simply " Talk…

Let's make a simple, boring clothing analogy: "Why use a broken suit with an elegant combination of fabrics and colors when a simple, ill-fitting T-shirt and a pair of chinos would allow you to cover your body?"

Let's make yet another analogy with the body: "Why spend time in the gym working with barbells and dumbbells to achieve a shape and tone that would make you look like a Bronze of Riace instead of doing "just" 10k steps a day?"

Perhaps a dress can be too flowery or stiff; appropriate for a wedding, inappropriate for a day in the woods. A body may be too muscular for a marathon, not enough for a bodybuilding competition.

It is a matter of taste, of situation. Terse writing may fit here and not there; flowery writing may work here and not there. Prescription always depend on the context and the goals.

Re: Write simply (2021)

#175

Post by mattbee »

dang wrote: post #173
raincole wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very weird that you kept emphasizing "PG was like that before he got rich." You mentioned this point in both of your comments, but the ones you replied to didn't imply PG became like that after he got rich. None of them did. Straw-manning is a telling sigh that you got defensive about PG, for some reason.

Interesting! but I'm not sure I follow. The GP, for example, connected PG's writing style with his "position as a wealthy VC". Pointing out that the writing style predates that seems relevant. No? If people just dislike wealth, that's one thing, but nowadays they bring that up while criticizing his writing. I don't think those two things are connected, and it seems weird to conflate them.

They're conflated because pg has an interest in paying young people low rates to work their butts off for a slim chance of success. He's a master of talking his book, and a lot of his blogs read like grist for the high-school to startup pipeline.

They're also conflated because pg has written some very reductive stuff about smart people, sheep people, and ThInGs YOu JUSt CaNT SaY AnY MoRE. His stripped-back style makes for an easy read, but when he's not about his own experiences, it's ice-cold and humourless. That surely gets him pigeonholed quite fast outside of HN, even if you don't know what he does for a living.

Still this is the first of his blogs in years where I agree with him completely. No notes!

Re: Write simply (2021)

#176

Post by inimino »

voidhorse wrote: post #24
wilsonnb3 wrote: post #17

I get that this guy is like rich and famous and founded this website or something so people always post his stuff here but his writing always has this weird veneer of pseudo intellectual philosophy that I find very off putting.

The psuedo-intellectualism is more than just a veneer, I'm afraid, it's the real tooth of many of these pieces. pg has some decent takes on programming and one day decided that he might also have takes on things he knows far less about. These latter takes don't tend to be very good, which is unfortunate because he does actually manage to influence people.

That's a good story, but you didn't provide any evidence for it, so an anecdote like "I read his essay about [X] on which I'm an expert and it was wrong" would have more value.

Re: Write simply (2021)

#177

Post by inimino »

josephg wrote: post #145
Volrath89 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I asked ChatGPT to rewrite the slatesarcodex article as if it were PG: "I Can Tolerate Anything Except the Outgroup: Tolerance is important, but it should not extend to the "outgroup". An outgroup is defined as those who are perceived as fundamentally different or opposed. Tolerance towards the outgroup can lead to harm to one's own group and undermine social cohesion. It's better to tolerate ideas and individuals wi…

Its hard to focus on the style of that summary you gave when that "summary" doesn't capture what the slatestarcodex article actually says. That summary is vaguely upsetting in how confidently wrong it is. The actual "I can tolerate anything except the outgroup" article is a ponderous critique of our human tribal tendancy to find an outgroup and hate them. The article finally comes full circle when the author notices…

"Vaguely upsetting in how confidently wrong it is" is a good summary of ChatGPT in general, so the summary captures what ChatGPT is better than it captures what the article says. Very few humans are both capable of putting sentences together that coherently, and so incapable of a first-order understanding of the author's point. We don't have ready words for (or widespread recognition of) this kind of LLM-idiocy, because internalizing a probability distribution over words, sentences, and paragraphs without any correlated world model is not something humans do. "Bullshitting" comes close, but there's a difference of degree that becomes a difference in kind.

Re: Write simply (2021)

#178

Post by voidhorse »

inimino wrote: post #176
voidhorse wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The psuedo-intellectualism is more than just a veneer, I'm afraid, it's the real tooth of many of these pieces. pg has some decent takes on programming and one day decided that he might also have takes on things he knows far less about. These latter takes don't tend to be very good, which is unfortunate because he does actually manage to influence people.

That's a good story, but you didn't provide any evidence for it, so an anecdote like "I read his essay about [X] on which I'm an expert and it was wrong" would have more value.

Eh, it's an opinion that I'm not inclined to spend time or effort backing up. I do agree that if I did actually back it up, of course the post would be more valuable. Instead, I'll be lazy and say read the essays and judge for yourself, you might disagree! I'm also of the opinion that if you have even a passing familiarity with any "soft" science (communications, sociology, philosophy, literature) you'll likely find at least one essay that makes you agree with me.

Re: Write simply (2021)

#179

Post by simonebrunozzi »

dang wrote: post #110
simonebrunozzi wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

dang, I think you should write like Paul - meaning, you should write a few essays, and see if you like writing them, and then if people like reading them. I can happily offer to read your drafts. Also, I am sure PG is really smart, but do not underestimate the effect on your brain of spending hours a day on HN, for many years. That's what makes me curious to read your stuff, in addition to Paul's. Ah, I believe the s…

Spending hours a day on HN has certainly affected my brain but I shudder to imagine how. I'm pretty content to stick to internet comments. They're below the radar, and I prefer to hide.

I completely understand and respect that.

You might want to try writing anonymously and/or use a pseudonym.

It would allow you to share some of your thoughts with the world, and protect your privacy at the same time.

Re: Write simply (2021)

#180

Post by inimino »

voidhorse wrote: post #178
inimino wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a good story, but you didn't provide any evidence for it, so an anecdote like "I read his essay about [X] on which I'm an expert and it was wrong" would have more value.

Eh, it's an opinion that I'm not inclined to spend time or effort backing up. I do agree that if I did actually back it up, of course the post would be more valuable. Instead, I'll be lazy and say read the essays and judge for yourself, you might disagree! I'm also of the opinion that if you have even a passing familiarity with any "soft" science (communications, sociology, philosophy, literature) you'll likely find…

Well, I don't suppose I can disprove that without reading all the essays... but I do think that pg's writings have a style that's less amenable to more humanities-oriented readers.
Post reply on HN