I recognize that the following is a classic HN "middlebrow dismissal" but I'd be wary of taking writing advice from a company that has this text (and nothing else) on their homepage:<p>> <i>Alephic is an AI-first technology foundry built to tackle marketing's most complex challenges. We don't just advise—we engineer, prototype, and deploy custom AI systems that help marketing teams do the impossible.</i><p>I read this twice and I still have no idea what they do!
<p><pre><code> Do Don't
Think from first principles Repeat what everyone else is saying Draw from
diverse references and domains Stay confined to marketing jargon
</code></pre>
<i>"We paint visions of transformative change while keeping one foot firmly in practical reality."</i><p>Famously non-jargon, non-marketing language never encountered before in a tech blog
Another writing style guide, barely distinguishable from many others, but written in tone like it's radically different. Maybe this is precisely the point, though.
Perhaps it should be clarified that this is a writing guide for marketing material and the formula is the same as always; concise sentences with a focus on action (readers almost always need to be pushed to click something, do something or buy something). If you write a blog, fiction or poetry, this writing guide will most likely crush any creativity, originality and desire to write.<p>If you want to learn how to write well, your best bet is to read different great writers and notice how they write, what they write about and what they leave out. Take one of their sentences and rewrite it in your own words.Deconstruct every sentence. Deconstruct every sentence.Take their sentences and rewrite it in your own words.
This is nice but they forgot to mention the most important rule all guides like this should mention first: There are no hard-and-fast rules, all rules have an exception.<p>For example, including unnecessary sentences and paragraphs is somethings necessary. You can do without them but with them you get character, voice, a smoother transition. How do you know what is necessary and what isn't? That's the whole point of the rule I mentioned earlier.
I first thought this is from the German AI/LLM company Aleph Alpha [1] but learned it is a different enterprise albeit in the same domain.
It's still quite a hustle and bustle in the zoo, I'm looking forward to a little more overview and a little less hype …<p>[1] <a href="https://aleph-alpha.com/" rel="nofollow">https://aleph-alpha.com/</a>
It's interesting to me that the article itself employs quite a few stylistic choices that are often marked as "obvious LLM tells" (numbered lists, boldface everywhere, and even the no-space emdash right in the opening paragraph).<p>I'm a heavy user of those things myself... still: interesting, given what they seem to be doing.
> Use "1800s/1900s/2000s" instead of "19th/20th/21st century". Using century numbers is confusing for many people because the 19th century actually refers to the 1800s. For clarity, always use the specific years.<p>Way to assume your audience are morons.
I’m still trying to grok this post from the same company<p><a href="https://www.alephic.com/the-one-true-path" rel="nofollow">https://www.alephic.com/the-one-true-path</a>
Writing like this leads to very terse, cold and impersonal communications. Perhaps it would be good for dry technical instructions or documentation, but naught else.
A lot of this is good and overlaps quite a bit with our one [0], but a lot of it seems to be too fluffy and go against its own rules.<p>> At the intersection of AI, code, and marketing expertise, we create solutions that were impossible yesterday and will be commonplace tomorrow.<p>I couldn't tell if this was an example of what they want or what they don't want.<p>Also the dos and dont's are vague enough that I can imagine the CEO or whoever wrote this saying "no your sentence is bad because it's getting lost in the tacitcal minutiae, but mine is good because I'm focusing on strategic, long-term implications"<p>- DO: Focus on strategic, long-term implications<p>- DON'T: Get lost in tactical minutiae<p>Similarly:<p>- DO: Acknowledge the magnitude of AI's impact<p>- DON'T: Overhype capabilities beyond what's currently possible<p>isn't it easier to just say 'always use your crystal ball to perfectly explain how AI will affect our future'.<p>> Utilize diagrams, screenshots, charts, and other visual aids to clarify complex concepts. For software documentation, use animated GIFs or videos when static images won't suffice.<p>Probably means something like "Use diagrams, screenshots, and charts appropriately. Use animated gifs where needed"<p>Which again is kind of just saying "make it good", but with words like "utilize" and "suffice" which are probably sprinkled in with AI.<p>[0] <a href="https://styleguide.ritza.co" rel="nofollow">https://styleguide.ritza.co</a>