This is especially true for the IT-based stack exchanges, where the questions are all pertinent to an issue the searcher has. However, many times these popular questions have pages of answers, and the answers at the top aren't necessarily pertinent, even if the user has marked the question as answered.   Would it be possible to implement a feature to star an answer, and not the just the question? So that if we run into the problem again, we don't have to browse through pages of answers.
Often times I am not interested in the question so much as I am the answer. Unfortunately, the only site option for bookmarking an optimal answer is to bookmark the question. This leaves you having to remember that no the question wasn't that great, but there's an answer in here worth a million. It'd be nice to be able to favorite an answer allowing you to jump immediately to the answer that was much more valuable than the question. I understand that I can bookmark the answers link using my browser but it seems being able to favorite the answer within the site's ecosystem is useful.
The intuition I have for why quantum computing can perform better than classical computing is that the wavelike nature of wavefunctions allow you to interfere multiple states of information with a single operation, which theoretically could allow for exponential speedup.   But if it really is just constructive interference of complicated states, why not just perform this interference with classical waves?  And on that matter, if the figure-of-merit is simply how few steps something can be calculated in, why not start with a complicated dynamical system that has the desired computation embedded in it. (ie, why not just create "analog simulators" for specific problems?) mkdir -p will create a directory; it will also make parent directories as needed.  Does a similar command exist for files, that will create a file and parent directories as needed? Is there way to replace value of symbolic link? Is there way to replace value of symbolic link?  For example I want to replace symbolic link like this:  first -&gt; /home/username/foo/very/long/directories/that/I/do/not/want/to/type/again    to   second -&gt; /home/username/bar/very/long/directories/that/I/do/not/want/to/type/again   I want to change only foo to bar.  Of course I can create a link again, but if it is possible to replace value of the link, it become easier. Do I need a transit visa to collect and re-check my luggage at Istanbul Ataturk airport? I'm Egyptian and flying to Cairo from Tbilisi, via Istanbul. The first flight Tbilisi-Istanbul is on Atlasjet, then from Istanbul to Cairo I am flying on Egyptair. For that, I have to recheck in at Istanbul to my Egyptair flight  Will I need to pass passport control at Istanbul airport to collect my bags and check in on Egyptair? Will I need a transit visa for that? Or it can be all done through neutral zone? How can blackbody radition be explained by quantization? I don't understand why quantization makes a peak on the blackbody radiation curve (so there is no ) and the relationship between that peak and quantization concept.  When the blackbody is heated, it starts to glow. All atoms start to vibrate. Total heating energy must be divided and equally shared by all atoms of blackbody. Right?  But what happens next?  Do some atoms get much more energy to radiate at higher frequency and waste the energy? What happens at the atomic level, so quantization can explain it? What does classical physics claim, so it can not explain the radiation curve? Georeferencing scanned map using ArcMap? Under what assumptions can a semigroup $(S,*)$ be embedded into a group? I am trying to prove that the affine hull of a set $X \subseteq \mathbb{R}^d$ is equal to the affine hull of the clojure of that set: $$ \text{aff}(X) = \text{aff}(\text{cl}(X)). $$  Proving $\text{aff}(X) \subseteq \text{aff}(\text{cl}(X))$ is easy, but containment in the other direction is harder.  I am assuming there is a sequence $\{ x_k \}_{k=1}^\infty \subseteq X$ such that $\lim_{k\to \infty} x_k = x^*$. The point $x^*$ is obviously contained in $\text{aff}(\text{cl}(X))$. But I am not sure how to show it is also in $\text{aff}(X)$, specifically because I am not sure how to show that $x^*$ lies on a line connecting two points in $X$.  Any suggestions on how to surmount this hurdle are welcome. Reset post score to 0 on migration I suggest that when a post is migrated from one site to another, that the question vote score get reset to zero (or perhaps only a negative vote score is reset to zero). Often people will downvote a question when the only thing that's "wrong" with it is that it's posted on the incorrect site. After migration, those downvotes hang around as a negative score and may unfairly bias the treatment of the question. Can I use my laptop as a second monitor? Is it possible to make my laptop's screen act as a second monitor for my desktop computer? Can't unhide objects When having a number of files opened in Texmaker, at the top of editor pane, there is a drop down panel with the names of open documents in it. I prefer to have tabs of open documents at the top of editor pane, similar to Texstudio and Winedt. Is there a way that I can change this setting? Batch file to delete files older than N days Where can I ask an open discussion question? The foreach identifier and closures Function pointers, Closures, and Lambda I am just now learning about function pointers and, as I was reading the K&amp;R chapter on the subject, the first thing that hit me was, "Hey, this is kinda like a closure." I knew this assumption is fundamentally wrong somehow and after a search online I didn't find really any analysis of this comparison.  So why are C-style function pointers fundamentally different from closures or lambdas? As far as I can tell it has to do with the fact that the function pointer still points to a defined (named) function as opposed to the practice of anonymously defining the function.  Why is passing a function to a function seen as more powerful in the second case, where it is unnamed, than the first where it is just a normal, everyday function that is being passed?  Please tell me how and why I am wrong to compare the two so closely.  Thanks. What is Hawking radiation and how does it cause a black hole to evaporate? My understanding is that  isn't really radiated from a black hole, but rather occurs when a particle anti-particle pair spontaneously pop into existence, and before they can annihilate each other, the antiparticle gets sucked into the black hole while the particle escapes. In this way it appears that matter has escaped the black hole because it has lost some mass and that amount of mass is now zipping away from it.  Is this correct? If so, wouldn't it be equally likely that the particle be trapped in the black hole and the antiparticle go zipping away, appearing as if the black hole is spontaneously growing and emitting antimatter?  How is it that this process can become unbalanced and cause a black hole to eventually emerge from its event horizon and evaporate into cosmic soup over eons? I just came onto a project with a pretty huge code base.   I'm mostly dealing with C++ and a lot of the code they write uses double negation for their boolean logic.    if (!!variable &amp;&amp; (!!api.lookup("some-string"))) {        do_some_stuff();  }                                      I know these guys are intelligent programmers, it's obvious they aren't doing this by accident.   I'm no seasoned C++ expert, my only guess at why they are doing this is that they want to make absolutely positive that the value being evaluated is the actual boolean representation. So they negate it, then negate that again to get it back to its actual boolean value.   Is this correct, or am I missing something? Nautilus does not show the left bar, how do I turn it back on? When I open nautilus does not open the left bar where it says computer and down markers such as music, documents, videos, downloads. I reinstalled nautilus from the synaptic package manager but nothing happened. What I can do to make that bar visible again? Can a dichotomous variable (yes/no) be merged with a Likert measure (1,2,3,4) using z scores?