If you've never played a "Smash Bros." game, think of it as a fighting-game version of "Mario Kart." Nintendo's large cast of famous faces — from Mario to Donkey Kong, Pikachu to Princess Peach — take each other down in a simplified fighting format. They each have their own set of moves and traits that map to that character — Pikachu shoots lightning, Mario throws fireballs, Link wields the Master Sword, etc.

Rather than taking players on one at a time, "Smash Bros." distinguishes itself by throwing anywhere from two to eight players into a match at any given time. It's a chaotic, silly, surprisingly deep fighting-game series with a serious following.

And in 2018, it's apparently coming back: The series is headed to the Nintendo Switch in 2018. So far, we can spot Link, Bowser, Pit, Pikachu, Kirby, the two Inklings from "Splatoon," and Mario — and it looks like Link is represented in his "Breath of the Wild" form. But is this an entirely new game? What we don't know about "Smash Bros." far outweighs what we do — but Nintendo says it's coming this year, so we'll assuredly learn more soon!

Release Date: 2018

Platforms: Nintendo Switch

Your interview outfit should be professional and put-together. It won't necessarily be the most stylish outfit you'll ever wear, but it should communicate confidence and a good work ethic.

But the days of absolutely having to wear a suit to a job interview are over, said Marc Cenedella, CEO of recruiting firm Ladders.

In fact, rolling up to the office in a suit or skirt suit when everyone else is wearing jeans could hurt you in the interview process. It shows you're not a cultural fit for the company.

"Some of the most common mistakes people make when dressing for an interview are following old and outdated advice or not taking the time to do their research and ask questions about the company culture ahead of time," Cenedella told Business Insider.

Cenedella suggested reaching out to your recruiter, company contact, or the HR team to get a sense for what people at the company typically wear to work.

"You can always be direct and ask 'Will I feel out of place in formal business attire?'" Cenedella told Business Insider. "If they answer 'not at all,' you know it's expected."

Regardless of the typical level of dress in the office, some decorum during the interview is still necessary — yoga pants, wrinkled shirts, or ripped denim shouldn't be in your interview wardrobe even for the most casual workplaces.

Here are the 17 things you definitely shouldn't wear to a job interview:

LONDON — The former CEO of Visa in the UK and Ireland has joined a new cryptocurrency startup that hopes to make spending crypto an everyday occurrence.

Marc O'Brien, who led Visa UK & Ireland from 2008 and 2014, has joined Crypterium as CEO. The startup, which was incorporated in Estonia last year, raised $52 million through an initial coin offering (ICO) at the end of last year.

The startup was founded by a group of entrepreneurs who want to make it easy to pay with cryptocurrency such as bitcoin and ether in everyday situations.

O'Brien told Business Insider: "The idea is that cryptocurrency is actually quite difficult today to use as an everyday method of payment. If you were to go to an exchange with your bitcoin or your ether it would probably take you 3 to 7 days to get that money paid out into a normal bank account.

"What Crypterium will do is make that whole process seamless and give an opportunity for a consumer to actually use their cryptocurrency to pay for everyday items."

O'Brien was hired after a search by executive recruiter Sheffield Haworth. O'Brien said: "They're looking for an experienced financial services team now.

"They're very good at recognising that they were the right team for the concept and the initial coin offering but now that they're moving into the operating model they need to bring in experienced professional staff that are used to dealing with large-scale, global operations."

Crypterium now hopes to partner with either Visa or MasterCard to launch cryptocurrency cards or virtual cards.

O'Brien said: "That card will be attached to a wallet that we've created and every time the consumer makes a transaction we will receive a request for that transaction in our systems, we will check the bitcoin or ether account and provided that they've got sufficient balance we will execute a trade and mark their bitcoin balance for a trade and approve the transaction. You can be in a store and all of that's done in a fraction of a second."

The way Crypterium will do this without being exposed to the extreme volatility of cryptocurrencies in the process is the company's "secret sauce," O'Brien said, and the intellectual property around this is "carefully protected."

Spending crypto doesn't offer much appeal to those who are not die-hard crypto enthusiasts in many developed markets, but O'Brien highlighted the usefulness of Crypterium's products in high inflation markets such as Argentina or Turkey.

"We have a unique opportunity to provide a safe haven to some extent for consumers in those countries," he said. "The concern that many of them might have about getting access to that currency in a short space of time for immediate spending, we're going to be in a position to bridge that gap and make it an instant gratification.

"We are now looking at how we organise to be a global operating business and that means we are taking top-level legal advice on how to structure ourselves so that we can actually launch in the US, launch in Latin America, launch in Singapore, with the right and appropriate licenses in each of those jurisdictions."

Crypterium has a team of three people in London and 10 in Moscow. O'Brien said it is considering offices in New York, Singapore, and Miami.

O'Brien said Crypterium is in discussion with potential partners at the moment and hopes to launch its first products by the autumn.

Remember Don't Be Evil?

When Google became a verb in the early 2000s, the adage became a slogan that paid dividends for the tech company.

Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin enshrined it in the company's official code of conduct for employees, and inumerable news stories and TV segments gushed over the benevolent tech giant's admirable combination of innovation and altruism.

At some point during the past month that changed. As Gizmodo first reported on Friday, the famous phrase has lost its preeminence in Google's code of conduct. The new code of conduct makes a passing, almost token, mention of Don't Be Evil in the last sentence — but it's a marked downgrade from its previous prominence in the code, when it had several paragraphs dedciated to it.

Google argues that the fact that the phrase remains in the code, albeit at the end, shows that it's still "foundational."

Fair enough.

Here's the reality though: Google outgrew its Don't Be Evil motto from the moment it was coined.

Google's two founders and former CEO Eric Schmidt AP The phrase was never meant to be a declaration of human rights. It was coined by former Googler Paul Buchheit, who has said that he had shady internet business practices like spyware and spam in mind when he came up with it.

But the world wanted to see it as someting grander. And Google never did much to disabuse anyone of the notion. The warm and fuzzy glow Google got from Don't Be Evil was too valuable to quit, even as it became increasingly clear to anyone that worked at the company that the phrase was dangerous. It set a standard that Google, or any for-profit company, could never live up to.

Google makes its money from targeted ads that rely on knowing as much about us as possible. Every single product in its catalogue, from virtual assistants that tell you the weather to AI-based email that can finish your sentences for you, ultimately lead to showing you better, more effective ads.

The project has grown into something so extensive and vast that the company now has its hands in everything from hardware to automobiles. It's tough to position youreself as the Don't Be Evil company when you're building products with components that use rare earth minerals and are assembled by laborers in offshore factories you don't control; or when you offer online services in countries with repressive free speech rules.

The 2015 restructuring of Google into Alphabet was the first effort to move away from the problematic legacy phrase.

Now, like characters crowding the bed of a dying Count in a Russian novel, Google and its shareholders are waiting for Don't Be Evil to draw its final breath. After all these years, Google can finally claim its inheritance.

If Google's YouTube were a standalone company, the world's dominant video-sharing site would be worth more than big blue-chip companies like General Electric, IBM, PepsiCo or Comcast, and would be roughly the same value as media powerhouse Walt Disney Co., according to investment bank Morgan Stanley.

In a note to investors on Friday, the investment bank concluded that YouTube is worth $160 billion, based on the firm's analysis of its business. Since Google has yet to reveal YouTube's financial performance, Morgan Stanley's sum-of-the-parts valuation represents only an estimate (the firm put a 7x multiple on its estimated 2019 revenue for YouTube).

But if that figure is even close, it underscores how the website that Google acquired for $1.65 billion in 2006 has grown into one of the most valuable media entities in the world. And it could become more valuable still. Morgan Stanley said YouTube stands to bank big money from subscription music.

YouTube managers announced this week that they plan to roll out revamped subscription services. The much ignored YouTube Red is dead and from the ashes comes YouTube Music Premium, a $9.99 subscription music service that enables users to watch ad-free videos.

In addition, YouTube has created YouTube Premium, which offers ad-free music videos, offline downloads, and YouTube's original movies and TV shows for $11.99.

Brian Ach / Stringer "YouTube's new Music and Premium products speak to a growing subscription focus which could lead to 13X higher user monetization," the bank said in the report.

According to Morgan Stanley data, music is the most common type of content consumed on YouTube, with 36% of users turning to the site for music everyday, compared to 22% watching movies and movie clips and 20% watching TV show clips every day.

Every 1 million YouTube users who switch to a paid subscription instead of listening to music for free on the site will add 1% more revenue to YouTube's topline, Morgan Stanley estimates.

Of course, Google has tried its hand at music subscriptions before with little success, compared to streaming-music rivals, Spotify or Apple Music, the sector's leaders.

But even if YouTube's paid music service doesn't become the No.1 streaming service on the charts, the site is already a massive media entity in its own right.

A decade ago, some observers thought the giant media conglomerate Viacom, parent company of MTV and Paramount Pictures, would squash the then tiny YouTube in court, after suing the video service for copyright infringement. Not only did Google-owned YouTube prevail in that landmark case, but — based on the Morgan Stanley estimates — the video site is now worth more than 10 times Viacom's $12 billion market cap.

Here's how YouTube's $160 billion estimated value compares to the market capitalizations of some of the most well-known corporations:

Mike Walsh is a member of the Uber rich, meaning he's über rich off the ride-hailing service.

In 2010, a mutual friend introduced him to Ryan Graves, who worked an IT specialist job and was considering a move to San Francisco to help build something called UberApp. After Graves explained the concept, Walsh saw "the common sense approach" for someone, like a limo driver, to make money with an asset, a vehicle, that was under-utilized. He told Graves to take the job.

Graves became the first employee of Uber, and as a show of thanks, he, Travis Kalanick, and Garrett Camp (another cofounder) offered Walsh an opportunity to invest in the company.

He accepted. Since 2010, Uber's valuation has soared from $5.4 million to around $72 billion, netting Walsh huge returns on paper, which he declined to share with Business Insider.

Today, Walsh helps runs Structure Capital, an early-stage venture fund that he started in 2013 with some of the earnings from his Uber deal. The fund invests almost exclusively in sharing economy companies whose goal is to reduce waste by putting under-utilized assets — such as people, spaces, and vehicles — to work. He manages the firm alongside partners Jillian Manus and Jacob Shea.

Together, they call themselves the "architects of the zero waste economy."

Companies backed by Structure Capital range from Wag, an "Uber for dog-walking" app, to Peerspace, which lets users book meeting rooms, event venues, and filming locations by the hour, to Honk, a company that provides on-demand roadside assistance as fast as Uber hails a car. As a cohort of startups, they aim to make the sharing economy the dominant marketplace.

We talked to Walsh and his partners, Manus and Shea, about how Structure Capital came to be.

Structure Capital raised a VC fund on the back of Uber's success

In 1999, Walsh cut his first check as a hobby venture capitalist to a little-known cloud software company called Salesforce.com. He said he used the company's product as a customer first and liked it.

After Salesforce went public in 2004, Walsh, who was then running Leverage Software, a startup that brought social networking to enterprises, sold half of his stock and continued to build his company. He had already given the other half to his dad, a plumber, as a birthday present.

Lightning struck twice when Walsh signed on as one of the first committed investors in Uber in 2010 and saw massive returns, which encouraged him to focus full-time on venture. He pitched a couple of venture firms on taking him on as a partner, but they weren't hiring, Walsh said.

Instead, he started his own fund. He put about $300,000 of his Uber stock into the pot and offered to share the returns with other limited partners who invested in the fund. It was a "marketing tool," Walsh said. Within six months of starting the fund, his Uber investment grew to $3 million as new investors gave the ride-hailing startup higher and higher valuations.

Structure Capital raised $10 million from dozens of investors for its first fund.

Uber is worth around $72 billion. Thomson Reuters

Walsh later recruited Shea, a veteran coder who previously held consulting positions at Dell Computers, Qualcomm, the NFL, and Pixar, to bring technical expertise. Manus, a prolific angel investor in her own right, joined the firm as managing partner in 2013 and put in $1 million of her own money. She is a marketing guru who knows everyone, according to Walsh.

Here's why the sharing economy matters

Walsh had built a reputation for spotting billion-dollar-plus "unicorns." In the early days of Structure Capital, he was already receiving around 100 pitches per month. At first, he only took meetings with sharing economy companies simply as a way to "filter" his inbox, Walsh said.

But a more concrete investment thesis started to take shape: The sharing economy was good for the environment, the community, and the pocket book, Walsh said he began to realize.

"Growing up in a lower-middle class neighborhood in the industrial town of Worcester, Massachusetts, I was accustomed to hand-me-downs, sharing of things like tools and shovels, and — at times — even taking advantage of free food programs. My dad hustled to make a living, but oftentimes, there just wasn't enough work to go around in the mid-70s," Walsh said.

His background taught him "a couple really valuable lessons" at the core of his thesis.

He went on, "People, generally, want to do whatever they can to provide for their loved ones. Skills marketplaces allow people to find work to supplement their incomes or try new things. Uber, Wag, Feastly, and Laurel and Wolf are great examples of this. These companies allow individuals to earn an income while 'waiting' for things to turn around, or to discover new passions."

He added that the sharing economy helps people and companies "do more with less" — a necessity as the global population grows and the world's natural resources deplete.

"The bonus is that our companies make money and we benefit, as do our investors," Walsh said.

Structure Capital wants to build a new wave of 'Ubers'

Structure Capital reaches into all corners of the sharing economy — a market that's expected to reach $40.2 billion in revenue in 2022, up from $18.6 billion in 2017, according to Juniper Research. Its portfolio companies let hair stylists rent salon space, freelancers find a meeting room, and women invite other women into their homes for unique networking opportunities.

Some companies have a more literal interpretation of the "zero waste economy." A company spun out of MIT called LiquiGlide invented a slippery coating that allows viscous liquids (think toothpaste, ketchup, and glue) to slide out of any container with ease. Structure Capital said the company will start supplying the material to a top toothpaste brand for a percentage of every tube sold.

Another portfolio company, Copia, sends drivers to pick up uneaten food from enterprises and events and delivers it to nonprofits in need. Its customers then get to write off the donation as a tax deduction. Copia recovered enough food from the Oscars last year to feed 1,000 hungry people.

Structure Capital has invested in approximately 140 companies to date.

Walsh said one of the first thing he asks himself when he's evaluating a startup is: "Do we think we know a thousand people, socially, who will use this thing?"

Ultimately, the decision of whether or not to invest comes down to a gut check.

He asks himself if the founders are "people we want to hang out with" and, most importantly, people who "treat people the way we think people should be treated," Walsh said.

Carlos Ghosn, the man who leads the world's largest car company, says people no longer care about range anxiety with electric cars, they just need to be less expensive.

Ghosn made the comments during a news conference in Hong Kong this week, where he also argued that autonomous-driving technology isn't a priority for consumers either.

"We have seen that consumers do not talk anymore about range or autonomy as long as you guarantee more than 300 kilometers (about 186 miles)," Ghosn told reporters, according to the Nikkei Asia Review.

Ghosn helms the Renault-Nissan-Mitsubishi Alliance, which is the parent company of Nissan, the French automaker Renault and Mitsubishi. While he was CEO of Nissan from 2001 to 2017, Ghosn oversaw the development of the Nissan Leaf, the company's first mass-market electric car.

The Leaf eventually became the best-selling electric vehicle in the world. The second generation of the Leaf hit the US market earlier this year with a base price just under $30,000 and a range of about 151 miles. A longer-range, 225-mile version is expected in 2019.

2018 Nissan Leaf. Hollis Johnson/Business Insider

Ghosn's remarks come as Tesla struggles to produce its own mass-market EV, the Model 3 — a car that starts at $35,000 with a minimum range of 220 miles on a single charge.

However, due to Tesla's rollout schedule and some well-documented production challenges, Tesla is only producing the longer-range (310 miles), more-expensive version of the Model 3, which can top out at nearly $60,000.

While Ghosn is less concerned with delivering a tech-heavy EV, the new Leaf does offer some industry standard features like intelligent cruise control and a so-called "e-Pedal," which effectively lets driver accelerate and stop the car using just one pedal. Tesla CEO Elon Musk has touted his company's Autopilot technology which operates much the same way, with some additional functionality.

That the Leaf is the world's best-selling electric vehicle, in a market where EVs barely make up about 1% of global auto sales, says quite a lot, especially as Tesla struggles to meet its own goal of producing 5,000 Model 3s per week by the end of June.

During his talk with reporters this week, Ghosn took a moment to flex a little, explaining how he came to learn what he knows about selling electric cars, and it could be read as a subtle jab at Tesla: "You could not have guessed this through studies," Ghosn said, "You had to have 500,000 [electric] cars on the ground to understand," he said.

Netflix's "A Christmas Prince" is getting a royal wedding.

2017's "A Christmas Prince" was made in the vein of a Lifetime Christmas movie and gained a lot of popularity over the holiday season. It also proved that the streaming service was some serious competition for networks like Lifetime and Hallmark.

In December, we wrote about how terrible the protagonist, Amber, a journalist, is at her profession. But that didn't hold back people from watching it over and over. Netflix even expressed concern about subscribers who were watching the movie on repeat — some over 50 times in a matter of two weeks.

At the end of "A Christmas Prince," Amber and Prince Richard of Aldovia (a fictional country in Europe) get engaged.

The movie was so successful that Netflix has apparently decided to make a sequel inspired by the wedding of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry on Saturday. The sequel will come out "this holiday season."

On Friday, Netflix tweeted a video with the characters from "A Christmas Prince" watching Meghan and Harry's wedding, along with an announcement for the next movie, "A Christmas Prince: The Royal Wedding."

"The other royal wedding is almost upon us," the video says. "You're actually invited to this one."

Netflix confirmed to Business Insider that this movie is actually happening, and not just a royal wedding marketing stunt.

Here's the tweet which has the video:

Kids are spending more time online than ever.Shutterstock

Keeping your children safe online seems to get more difficult by the day. Children as young as five are getting tablets and smartphones. Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram and other apps have become essential to how kids and teens communicate with each other.

And yet, in the decades since children have been using the internet, a host of parental controls and devices have been developed to make it easier to monitor online use. And the new crop of parents are more familiar with the inner workings of the internet than ever before.

One of the most fearsome threats to kids is online luring — the act where a predator attempts to coerce or trick a child from the safety of their homes or schools, with the intention of committing sexual offenses or abducting them.

Parents should use what technology is available to protect their kids, but the most important thing parents can do, experts told Business Insider, is talk to their children about being safe online.

"The best parental control out there is talking to your kid," said Stephen Balkam, the founder and CEO of the Family Online Safety Institute.

Every child and teen is different. There isn't a one-size-fits-all approach to keeping your kids safe.

"It has to be a really complicated and layered approach. It really is different for every family, every parent and every kid," said Paige Hanson, chief of identity education at Symantec.

Here's what you need to know about protecting your kids from online predators — including online luring.

NASA's lead watchdog testified on Capitol Hill this week, and what he said about future plans for the International Space Station — a roughly $150 billion laboratory in the sky — should worry future astronauts.

The ISS is the size of a football field, hovers from about 250 miles up (a region called low-Earth orbit), and has hosted more than 225 people since 1998. It was envisioned as a laboratory, though also as a possible pit stop for missions to the moon or Mars.

NASA has pumped about $100 billion into the project over the decades. However, the Trump administration said it wants to end US involvement in September 2024 — about four years before the lab's "use by" date of 2028, after which the ISS may be sent to the spacecraft graveyard.

On Wednesday, Paul K. Martin, NASA's Inspector General, spoke before and submitted six pages of written testimony surrounding Trump's decision to the Senate Subcommittee on Space, Science, and Competitiveness. The subcommittee is chaired by Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, where NASA's Johnson Space Center and its more than 14,000 jobs are located.

In his testimony, Martin highlighted a range of current problems with and future concerns about the ISS, including its biggest predicament: NASA spends $3-4 billion a year to use and maintain the ISS while it's trying to build next-generation rocket and spaceship.

The International Space Station hovers about 250 miles above Earth in the foreground, while the moon floats in the background.NASA

"For the past 20 years, NASA has used the ISS as a research platform in low Earth orbit essential for advancing its deep space ambitions. But such celestial research comes at a steep cost," Martin wrote.

He added: "[E]ach year the Station remains in orbit, NASA allocates roughly half of its total human space flight budget to ISS operations — an expenditure that limits the Agency's ability to fund development of systems needed to visit the moon and other destinations beyond low Earth orbit."

Martin also said NASA's effort to reduce costs by privatizing the ISS — i.e. handing off aspects of its control to commercial companies— doesn't appear to be working that well.

But most critically, he implied that Trump's current plan to end the ISS program early might endanger future astronauts.

"Important work on several human health risks and technology demonstrations will not be completed by 2024," he said.

A vacuum of industry at the space station

The aurora over southern New Zealand, as seen by astronauts aboard the International Space Station on September 17, 2011.NASA/JSC

Congress began deeply scrutinizing ISS costs in the early 2000s. By the mid-2000s, as the retirement of the space shuttle program loomed, an idea emerged to gradually hand over the space station's control to commercial interests — its crew transportation, cargo delivery, and even much of the time astronauts spend on experiments.

Driving commercial interest in space, NASA managers thought, would eventually seed enough industry to privatize the orbiting lab and free up billions in funding annually to get to the moon or Mars.

"This was a strategy and a policy whose major stepping stone was based on hope," a former NASA employee who was close to the decision told Business Insider. (He asked to remain anonymous due to his ongoing proximity to ISS research.)

That hope, as Martin's testimony suggests, has yet to materialize.

"Candidly, the scant commercial interest shown in the Station over its nearly 20 years of operation gives us pause about the Agency's current plan," Martin said in his testimony.

SpaceX's astronaut spacesuit next to the Crew Dragon capsule.Elon Musk/SpaceX; InstagramNASA's chosen space taxi providers, Boeing and SpaceX, may launch their first crewed missions to the ISS at the end of 2018. Yet Martin said even with this progress highlight, the bid to attract self-sustaining commercial interest has shown little sign of working.

"[I]t is unlikely that a private entity or entities would assume the Station's annual operating costs, currently projected at $1.2 billion in 2024," he said. "Such a business case requires robust demand for commercial market activities such as space tourism, satellite servicing, manufacturing of goods, and research and development, all of which have yet to materialize."

More importantly, insiders say the commercialization effort has shrunk the time and resources available to NASA for its own research into ways of protecting astronauts during long-duration, deep-space missions.

'NASA may have to accept higher levels of risk'

An artist's concept of NASA's Deep Space Gateway (left) space station near the moon.NASA

NASA has the precarious responsibility of pushing human boundaries while also keeping a close eye on safety, especially following the losses of the Challenger and Columbia space shuttle crews.

The agency is currently working on a $23 billion disposable rocket program, called Space Launch System, in hopes of sending astronauts to the moon or Mars starting in the 2030s.

But Martin said that research on the space station to support such missions is now years behind, given Trump's new schedule for leaving the ISS.

"[R]esearch for at least 6 of 20 human health risks requiring the ISS for testing and 4 of 40 technology gaps will not be completed by the Station's planned retirement in September 2024," he said. "In addition, research into 2 other human health risks and 17 additional technology gaps is not scheduled to be completed until sometime in 2024, meaning that even minor schedule slippage could push completion past the Station's planned retirement date."

An artist's depiction of NASA's Space Launch System rocketing a crew toward orbit.NASA/MSFCMartin said an extension (back) to 2028, or possibly beyond this, might help close the gap for "on-orbit research into human health risks" and demonstrating new technologies that deep-space missions require.

"NASA must redouble its efforts to maximize the potential of whatever time remains on the Station," he said. If the space agency can't finish its basic research programs, though, Martin added that "NASA may have to accept higher levels of risk than planned for future exploration missions" — in other words, more dangerous missions for astronauts.

But Martin ultimately kicked the can back to the White House and Capitol Hill. "The sooner Congress and the Administration decide on a path forward for the future of the ISS, the better NASA will be able to plan," he said.

The former NASA employee we spoke with, who still performs work with the space agency, said the space agency needs to refocus the ISS on fundamental research, not privatization.

"We're squandering a research asset that has a limited timeframe of viability, now through 2024," he said. "We have scientific problems to address. If we're really serious about human exploration, we need to stop getting distracted by fantasies of ... commercial activities in space."