alt Hacker NewsSomething that was permanent and is now scheduled for destruction is still permanent, no?
Or can we at least agree that it was permanent at some point of its life?
> There comes a point with buildings and with space stations where tearing down and completely replacing them is a better and cheaper option than repairing or extending them. The ISS is nearing that point.
Sure, but that's the case for everything, including permanent things. My house won't be around forever, I would still call it a permanent housing.
> Something that was permanent and is now scheduled for destruction is still permanent, no?
No, the ISS never was permanent. It had a limited lifespan from the outset. It's actually beyond the original 15-year life. But it is not indefinite.
> The ISS was originally intended for a 15-year mission, but the mission has been repeatedly extended due to its success and support
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Space_Station#En...
> My house won't be around forever, I would still call it a permanent
That's true, in the sense that "A word means whatever I choose it to mean". If you were in a flat in an apartment building scheduled for demolition in 2030, would you call that "permanent housing" ?