Two self-driving cars involved in 'near miss' in California

Re:Two self-driving cars involved in 'near miss' in California by venomsnake on Friday June 26, 2015 @06:52AM (#9783463)

So the safety tech worked as expected. That is a great news. There are way more "near misses" everyday from human drivers.

Also seeing the "near miss" in the editorialized title - this Carlin quote is mandatory

“Here's a phrase that apparently the airlines simply made up: near miss. They say that if 2 planes almost collide, it's a near miss. Bullshit, my friend. It's a near hit! A collision is a near miss. [WHAM! CRUNCH!] "Look, they nearly missed!" "Yes, but not quite.”

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Two self-driving cars involved in 'near miss' in California by johnbaptiste on Friday June 26, 2015 @07:01AM (#9783495)

Carlin is ignorant. The OED lists usage of 'near miss' going back to 1940 in a maritime context. It was not made up by the airlines. Even if it was, the phrase still makes sense. It's not 'nearly missed', it's 'a miss where the objects were near'.

Have you ever heard the phrase 'it's funny because it's true'? Well this isn't true, so I don't see Carlin as funny. He's just ignorant and angry.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Two self-driving cars involved in 'near miss' in California by venomsnake on Friday June 26, 2015 @09:56AM (#9784325)

The definition of miss implies that is was near. So to a point Carlin is right.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Two self-driving cars involved in 'near miss' in California by arpa on Friday June 26, 2015 @08:21AM (#9783797)

I respectfully disagree. But that is just, like, my opinion, man.

[ Parent | on HN ]