instruction:
Given the Question and Answer pair, detect whether the answer is acceptable or not. Denote acceptable answer as "yes", otherwise denote as "no". An acceptable answer is consistent with the context in question, detailed, long, and uses general knowledge of English. Answers that are not definite and suggest a variety of options are not acceptable answers.
question:
Question: If you look at this gif of a drone replacing a lightbulb, you'll understand what concept I'm trying to find a word for. Using dynamite for fishing would be another example. I'm looking for a word that describes the use of high-tech equipment, for a purpose that is normally filled by low-tech equipment, usually done out of laziness or amusement. This is specifically relating to technology (overengineering is very close). 
Answer: One possible term is Overengineering. Overengineering (or over-engineering) is the designing of a product to be more robust or complicated than is necessary for its application....In one form, products are overbuilt, and have performance far in excess of needs (a family sedan that can drive at 300 km/h, or a home video cassette recorder with a projected lifespan of 100 years)....Alternatively, they may be overcomplicated the design may be far more complicated than is necessary for its use, such as a modern text editor asking whether files should be saved in ASCII, EBCDIC or various multi-byte formats.... Source: Wikipedia. Using a drone to replace a light bulb is certainly "far more complicated than is necessary", and a drone that is purchased for the purpose of being a light bulb changer would be especially well described by that phrase. Kerievsky (2002), speaking specifically about software engineering but in a way applicable to robotics, writes that overengineering happens when one engineers "in anticipation of needs that never materialize". Source: Joshua Kerievsky, April 01, 2002, Stop Over-Engineering!, Dr. Dobb's Journal. A drone-based light bulb changing system could be envisioned as becoming practically useful later if a need arises to change light bulbs located in inconventiently high or inaccessible locations (such as the roof of a stadium, or on the outside of a very tall flagpole), but the majority of people do not encounter such situations frequently, if at all.
answer:
no


question:
Question: Is there any difference between the two? In a technical document I have used a phrase "this is a temporal solution" and my coworker told that he'd use "temporary" in the context. Is one of the two more correct than the second? 
Answer: Temporal refers more to a time relationship between two variables. "he started abusing alcohol after he lost his job" shows a "temporal", not "temporary" relationship between alcohol use and job loss. It kinds of establishes an association. I don't think its exactly synonymous to temporary.
answer:
no


question:
Question: I'm referring to the peculiar habit I sometimes see in formal documents, where a number is given numerically after it's spelled out. It seems quite redundant: I need five (5) kumquats, stat! (Though it isn't always in a legal context, might it be related to this answer on this question?) 
Answer: The redundancy is presumably intended to reduce typos, forgery, and other types of error or manipulation in order to make the intent as clear as possible. It is known professionally as a CYA. It's obvious what my intent is when I rather carelessly write an I.O.U. for sevum kumquats, but alas, sevum is not really a word and opens up our contract to litigation. Adding the numeral 7 in parenthesis after sevum clarifies the intent. Similarly, if I were to write an I.O.U. for 3 kumquats, one could easily change that 3 to an 8, but it is far more difficult to make three look like eight. The practice appears to be a legal tradition rather than a universally honored rule. If you've ever written a check (known as a cheque to the Queen), you've written out a number with words and followed it with a numeral (albeit without parenthesis).
answer:

yes