[HN Gopher] Grammarly rebrands to 'Superhuman,' launches a new A...
___________________________________________________________________
Grammarly rebrands to 'Superhuman,' launches a new AI assistant
Author : coloneltcb
Score : 106 points
Date : 2025-10-29 13:12 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (techcrunch.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (techcrunch.com)
| haltingproblem wrote:
| "Grammarly announced Tuesday the acquisition of email client
| Superhuman in a push to build out its AI for its productivity
| suite. Neither companies provided details about the financial
| terms of the deal..... Superhuman was founded by Rahul Vohra,
| Vivek Sodera, and Conrad Irwin. The company raised more than $114
| million in funding from backers including a16z, IVP, and Tiger
| Global, with its last valuation at $825 million, according to
| data from venture data analytics firm Traxcn." [1]
|
| Interested to understand what would be the terms of the deal if
| Superhuman was valued at $825mm and what the founders cleared if
| the all the VCs rounds had 2-3x liquidation preferences.
|
| edit: added source
|
| [1] https://techcrunch.com/2025/07/01/grammarly-acquires-ai-
| emai...
| nathancahill wrote:
| Acquired 4 months ago, rebranding now.
| treetalker wrote:
| Just as everything tends to evolve into something resembling a
| crab, all software seems to eventually become email -- and, now,
| an LLM.
| MajimasEyepatch wrote:
| To be fair, productivity and writing tools are a better fit for
| LLMs than a lot of other use cases.
| treetalker wrote:
| Responding to you and fullshark, I'm not criticizing, only
| observing. Just as there is some evolutionary pressure
| causing carcinization, it's interesting to consider what
| pressure pushes things in the directions of email and LLMs.
|
| I don't know what it is, but would love to hear others'
| ideas.
| wredcoll wrote:
| I think "email" is a bit of a overly specific term, but if
| we take a small step back, communicating with other humans
| is usually the most important part of any piece of
| software.
| lm28469 wrote:
| I have a feeling these things will spend 99% of their
| processing time reading other LLMs outputs.
|
| Resumes written by LLMs and read by LLMs
|
| PR summaries written by LLMs and read by LLMs
|
| Emails written by LLMs and read by LLMs
|
| ...
|
| Everything could just be a few bullet points... these things
| were already 90% posturing and trying to sound fancy by using
| convoluted sentences and big words, now that it's been
| automated what's the point
| fullshark wrote:
| This company cannot afford to ignore LLMs.
| Brajeshwar wrote:
| "Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail. Those
| programs which cannot so expand are replaced by ones which
| can." -- Zawinski's Law
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamie_Zawinski
| treetalker wrote:
| Thanks, I was slightly off!
| nkko wrote:
| The company is being rebranded, not the product. Makes total
| sense, considering the brand equity, and also them going in the
| direction of productivity suite. Could be interesting.
| jhaile wrote:
| The name Superhuman makes a lot more sense for a company with a
| suite of AI productivity products. The "Grammarly" name was too
| focused on their original use case of just improving writing.
| 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
| It is a good product name. I can almost imagine an unimaginably
| rich AI company buying it just for the name.
| ljlolel wrote:
| Grammarly bought Superhuman and it's already a public company
| wferrell wrote:
| Not a public company.
| ljlolel wrote:
| Ah my mistake
| cardanome wrote:
| "Superhuman" gives me the creeps as a German.
|
| I know it has a positive connotation with super heroes in US
| culture but for me it sounds like Ubermensch. Especially as it
| is the direct opposite of "subhuman".
|
| Plus outside of tech bro circles, people either actively hate
| generative AI or are at least super annoyed by the over-hype of
| it. Duolingo went all in on AI and got a huge shitstorm.
|
| Branding your company on a current hype that might either burst
| soon or/and leave lots of people unemployed is maybe not a wise
| decisions.
| antiloper wrote:
| "Superhuman" is just "Superman" but without getting sued by
| DC comics.
| embedding-shape wrote:
| And with the additional small hint of Nazism for Europeans.
| But otherwise exactly the same more or less :)
| antiloper wrote:
| Nope. You must be thinking of the terms "Untermensch"
| (used a lot by Nazis) and "Ubermensch" (introduced by
| Nietzsche, and rarely used by Nazis). "Supermensch" was
| never used at all.
| embedding-shape wrote:
| Growing up in the 90s in Sweden, we definitively were
| taught that "Ubermensch" ("Overmanniska" in Swedish,
| literally "Above Human") was something the Nazis promoted
| during their time, together with demoting "Untermensch".
| Maybe that's wrong, and if so I thank you for the
| correction, but "Superhuman" does give me similar vibes
| regardless, not because of the exact wording, but because
| of the ideas/concepts.
| leobg wrote:
| Nietzsche's sister tried to garner favor with the Nazi
| regime. After Nietzsche's death, she took his notes,
| published them under the title "Will to Power" and made
| it all sound as though Hitler was the fulfillment of
| Nietzschean ideas. Even scholars who built their careers
| on Nietzschean philosophy fell for this. For example Ayn
| Rand. So your teachers were in good company. In truth,
| everything about the Nazis would have made Nietzsche sick
| to his stomach: group-think, racism, big government,
| socialism, robbery, personality cult, lack of intellect,
| mass appeal, Gleichschaltung, militarism.
| nilamo wrote:
| HN can be so funny sometimes. An actual German says "hey
| maybe this specific word shouldn't be used", and a random
| follows it up with "Nope, you're wrong." lmao
| mytailorisrich wrote:
| Because Ubermensch comes from Nietzche a century before
| the Nazis, as said, and had also a big influence on
| anarchists. No-one suggested that "Superhuman" shouldn't
| be used, either. A some point people need to put things
| in context and not "get the creeps" over any little
| things. I am sure that Germans don't even notice all
| those "Volkswagen" around them...
| not-embedding wrote:
| maybe given their history of literally accepting Hitler,
| Germans shouldn't be the ones policing what words can be
| used?
| embedding-shape wrote:
| Given everyone's history, someone somewhere has accepted
| evil in every country, so no one should police what words
| mean?
| umanwizard wrote:
| Why would Germans be an authority on what words should or
| shouldn't be used in English?
|
| This is sort of a reverse version of the very common
| trend of American political correctness / sensitivity
| language being exported around the world. Our ancestors
| committed heinous crimes, therefore we get to tell you
| how to speak, even though you had nothing to do with it.
| integralid wrote:
| A German person just said that it gives _them_ nazi
| viber, nothing about English words that should be used.
|
| Person above argues that the words are different
| therefore such connection can't be made which is just...
| wrong because they reply in a thread where someone
| literally said they made that connection.
|
| In short, we're explicitly talking about what Europeans
| see (me too, I'm not German), not what Americans should
| do.
| umanwizard wrote:
| > nothing about English words that should be used
|
| The comment I'm replying to says, verbatim, "hey maybe
| this specific word shouldn't be used" (as a paraphrase of
| that commenter's understanding of the argument being made
| by the German). That is what I'm responding to.
| nilamo wrote:
| I guess I don't see what the problem is?
|
| If someone says a particular word or phrase is
| problematic for them, no one can tell them they're wrong.
| You cannot dictate how other people respond to language,
| and it's really weird to see people trying to do that.
| umanwizard wrote:
| Sure, I can't tell them they're "wrong", i.e. I think the
| self-reported subjective feeling is probably accurate.
|
| What I object to is the implication that Americans should
| punish themselves by refraining from using normal words
| in their own language because Germans feel bad about
| something Germans did.
| balaz wrote:
| Yes, the idea of the death of God also gives me shivers.
| dude250711 wrote:
| 'Superhuman' sales representative: "Then you might be
| interested in our new Deus Ex package".
| umanwizard wrote:
| You cannot expect other countries to stop using normal words
| because they remind you of the bad things _your_ country did.
|
| Shame for what Germany did during the Nazi regime is
| something for Germans to bear, not Americans. We are not at
| fault for that, and we have no obligation to change our own
| culture to accommodate your guilt.
| JohnFen wrote:
| > I know it has a positive connotation with super heroes in
| US culture
|
| I'm not sure about this. I'm a US citizen, but it absolutely
| does not have positive connotations to me at all. It has very
| negative ones.
| umanwizard wrote:
| Are you a native English speaker? I can't think of a
| scenario where "superhuman" has negative connotations in
| American English. When we say someone has superhuman skill,
| or speed, or strength, it is always a positive thing.
| JohnFen wrote:
| > Are you a native English speaker?
|
| Yes, I am. Born and raised in the US.
|
| There are instances where the term is used in a positive
| sense, yes, but those are limited in scope. "Superhuman
| strength" rather than just "superhuman".
|
| "Superhuman" on its own is a term that has long been
| tightly associated with a wide variety of horrible
| things. Eugenics, for example.
| umanwizard wrote:
| I honestly think most American English speakers are not
| thinking about eugenics when they hear that term. I
| believe you when you say that it has those connotations
| for you but I think you are in a small minority.
| triceratops wrote:
| I thought Grammarly's brand was far better known than
| "Superhuman". I've never seen a YouTube ad for the latter.
| Yizahi wrote:
| Imagine searching web or any system really for "superhuman".
| Grammarly will be buried ten pages deep under other results.
| chemotaxis wrote:
| It won't be. Similarly, searching for "x" on Google returns
| Twitter as the first hit.
|
| Search results are optimized based on inferred intent, and
| the intent of most people searching for "superhuman" will be
| the Grammarly app.
| recapthis wrote:
| Strange that they didn't create a new name. Could it be that that
| was a deal breaker for Superhuman company and Grammarly wanted
| the deal so much?
| diegof79 wrote:
| Given their extensive expertise in browser and OS plugins, I
| understand this move.
|
| You can foresee a challenging future for the Grammarly product
| for a long time. Now that the "improve writing with AI" feature
| is everywhere, there are fewer reasons to pay for their
| subscription (e.g., I didn't renew this year because I have
| multiple AI subscriptions, and Grammarly was the least critical
| of them).
|
| However, for me, the main advantage of Grammarly was the user
| experience of having mistakes and suggestions inline and just a
| click away while editing, as well as the quality of the
| suggestions (with an LLM chat, there's a lot of trial and error
| and junk you need to filter out).
|
| I understand their move, but I wish they had developed a good
| minimalist native text editor with the same Grammarly suggestions
| and click-to-correct interface.
| charlie0 wrote:
| That is my number one issue with startups. They all start
| minimalist and end up bloated, some sooner than others, and
| what made them great disappears behind all this bloat. See:
| tyranny of the marginal user.
| jccalhoun wrote:
| This is getting to the antivirus bundle level of adding pointless
| features. I want grammarly to... check my grammar. I don't want
| it to write for me or suggest things.
| torginus wrote:
| Too bad, management wants you to train this shitty chatbot they
| plan to replace you with
| chemotaxis wrote:
| Perhaps you do, but I think this misses the point. For-profit
| writing is the most successful use case for LLMs today. A
| significant proportion of all the docs I see at work reek of
| LLMs. A fair amount of articles you read in the media are
| written by LLMs. Lawyers use it for legal briefs (sometimes
| with comical results). Doctors use it for patient notes.
|
| Basically, a significant portion of the population doesn't like
| writing or isn't good at it and _really_ wants a "get it done"
| button. I might not love it, but the market is there.
|
| So Grammarly is addressing a very real need. Further, it's
| really the only way for them to stay relevant, because you're
| getting AI editing / writing features in Gmail, Docs, Office
| 365, etc.
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| > So Grammarly is addressing a very real need. Further, it's
| really the only way for them to stay relevant, because you're
| getting AI editing / writing features in Gmail, Docs, Office
| 365, etc.
|
| They are a feature, not a company, with my apologies to Jobs.
| To your point, software and tools with native writing
| functionality can incorporate their own LLM support, as can
| native apps on mobile and desktop. Anything local will
| eventually be on device imho as model efficiency improves, or
| perhaps in browser (if not making API calls).
| ghaff wrote:
| Flagging likely spelling and basic grammar errors are
| pretty much incorporated into most word processors at this
| point. I may or may not choose to ignore them. But they
| work pretty well and I'm unlikely to use an external tool.
|
| I did write for a while for a tech site that had some
| Wordpress add-on that was oriented to making my writing, I
| guess, more friendly to an 8th grade level. I ignored it.
| gbalduzzi wrote:
| > because you're getting AI editing / writing features in
| Gmail, Docs, Office 365, etc.
|
| To me it is exactly why this move doesn't make sense.
|
| Why would I use Grammarly/Superhuman for writing with LLM
| assistance, when I have an out-of-box alternative that, at
| worst, is equal?
|
| They can't even compete with pricing, because they need to
| use their competitor models
| chemotaxis wrote:
| > Why would I use Grammarly/Superhuman for writing with LLM
| assistance, when I have an out-of-box alternative that, at
| worst, is equal?
|
| I think the answer is basically that they have brand
| recognition and they're trying to ride it. Right now, they
| have two bad choices: become irrelevant more quickly by
| having a product that's inferior to built-in LLM tools, or
| become irrelevant more slowly by having a tool that's
| comparable (and also works anywhere on the internet, not
| just on specific websites).
| viscanti wrote:
| Brand recognition that they're throwing away with a
| rebrand.
| Mistletoe wrote:
| My Anker earbuds have a new update adding AI. :P
| egorfine wrote:
| > I want grammarly to... check my grammar
|
| That's not how it works today.
|
| No sepulcator company gets profitable by shipping just a
| sepulcator. A sepulcator absolutely must have AI, monthly
| subscription, cloud services and - up until recently - has to
| be blockchain-based.
| codethief wrote:
| What's a sepulcator?
| egorfine wrote:
| Doesn't matter. No VC is going to invest in it unless it
| has AI.
| VTimofeenko wrote:
| It's a prominent element of the civilization of Ardrites
| from the planet of Enteropia; see "Sepulkaria"
| throwpoaster wrote:
| A widget.
| teddyh wrote:
| A thingamajig.
| romperstomper wrote:
| It is probably a reference to Stanislaw Lem's books
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sepulka
| ghaff wrote:
| Maybe it's just because I'm a reasonably decent writer but I
| used to know someone who was adamant about using Grammarly
| because it would increase traffic to my website--and I was
| basically "don't care."
|
| ADDED: Because it would make the writing friendlier to more
| people.
| Yizahi wrote:
| Supercringe
| andai wrote:
| Superhuman is such a funny name. It implies the Red Squiggles
| feature was the beginning of man-machine symbiosis...
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| They are paying UGC creators $10 per 1000 views. Ambitious.
| zonged wrote:
| Recently switched to Harper https://writewithharper.com/, a
| vastly superior grammar checker
| hungryhobbit wrote:
| Harper is a nice alternative, but it's still rough around the
| edges.
|
| For instance, if you have a misspelled word, and the correction
| options come up, you can't get out of them and return to where
| you were by using the keyboard. You can hit Escape to close
| them, but it doesn't restore your place in the text field, so
| you have to use your mouse to get back where you were.
|
| As a programmer who tries to use the keyboard as much as
| possible, this (incredibly easy to fix, I'm sure) bug drives me
| crazy! _Almost_ enough to make me go back to Grammarly.
| embedding-shape wrote:
| That seems to me not like a "rough around the edges" thing
| but "most basic, table-stakes feature". If you cannot resume
| typing after either cancelling a correction, or doing a
| correction, I'd say it is very broken and not ready to be
| marketed as a functioning tool. I mean, it's supposed to help
| you write, not make it more cumbersome.
| saint_yossarian wrote:
| I thought Harper is an LSP, so this sounds more like an
| integration issue with whatever editor you're using it with.
| biophysboy wrote:
| I get that software companies are rebranding products with
| superhero/god terminology to increase their perceived value and
| raise margin, but its not working for me because they are losing
| product differentiation. Why would I choose this app among the
| dozens of other tech products that promise godlike AI
| capabilities?
| yoyohello13 wrote:
| Even if we haven't hit the LLM ceiling, we've hit a ceiling on
| branding for sure. I'm interested to see where these names go
| next. Uberbeing! Omnipotence Plugin!
| dude250711 wrote:
| The society is not yet ready to discuss branding ecology. Nice
| names are a finite resource.
| ChrisArchitect wrote:
| Official post:
| https://www.grammarly.com/blog/company/introducing-new-super...
| faefox wrote:
| A great tool if you want your own unique voice to blend
| seamlessly into the tidal wave of LLM-generated mush flooding the
| internet.
| port11 wrote:
| I really like your comment. Of course all the LLM-generated
| content really is for other LLMs to read/scrape.
| egorfine wrote:
| I absolutely hate it when companies rename themselves. I know a
| company called an extremely stupid name by its young founder and
| they did not rename for decades and are now worth a bit short of
| $4T.
|
| Why do the smaller ones constantly need to change their name.
| Like that changes anything in their substance.
| janpio wrote:
| Data point 1: They get a TechCrunch post out of it.
| superbowl wrote:
| Moving to "AI" and away from a well-known brand smacks of
| desperation. Makes me wonder if the industry-wide trend of
| shoving AI into every product and feature, and channelling all
| investment into AI, is equally desperate.
| thw_9a83c wrote:
| One day, we will see a demand for services that are the opposite
| of "Superhuman". For example, a service like: "Deteriorate this
| text and make it look weirdly human. Add some typos and errors
| here and there, so that the final output looks 100% human-
| written."
| coffeebeqn wrote:
| The end state job for all the laid off office workers. A man
| can dream
| gaws wrote:
| Stop using Grammarly. There are better options available that
| don't exist just to collect your data to sell it to the highest
| bidder or feed it into an LLM.
| chatmasta wrote:
| Grammarly is a keylogger. It's astounding any enterprise allows
| it to run on their endpoints.
| DLion wrote:
| Switched to https://languagetool.org/ and I'm super happy about
| it.
| aetherspawn wrote:
| AIs are pretty bad at rewriting, they always pick gimmickey
| marketing words. I always thought of Grammarly as a premium entry
| into that segment for proper professional writing. Shame it's
| going the way of slop.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-10-29 23:01 UTC)