I would argue that Nintendo's problem isn't that its market has moved to mobile, the problem they face is that the market they want and need (console gamers) has moved on without them. I can't think of a single third-party developed game on a Nintendo console that excited me since Capcom put a bunch of Resident Evil games out on the GameCube. Nintendo itself owns a nice catalog of IP but you can only make so many Mario and Zelda games before the golden goose stops laying eggs. They need other developers making new titles, and good ones. They need a 'killer app.' People stopped buying Nintendo consoles for Mario after the GameCube and quit buying them for Zelda after the Wii. Nobody has bought an N console for a third-party game since the '64. Frankly, the last one I owned was a Super and now I play the remakes of the great games of that console on Sony and Microsoft systems, or emulate the originals on my PC or mobile. Nintendo is not Sony or Microsoft; their problems will not go away eventually by propping up their game division losses with profits in other sectors. They need good games or they are done in a few quarters of bad losses.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
There are more ways to learn, and prove that you have learned, than taking and passing tests. The idea that we go to school only to learn the rote of what is taught is the very problem with the system. Our education needs to focus on critical thinking and analysis, not memorizing the answers to test questions out of their textbooks.
I should be able to ask a class of high school students what they believe was the cause of some historic event, and hear back several different answers. They don't have to be the 'correct' answers, they just need to have some reasonable explanation behind them. If I actually did this though, I think I would hear one answer: the one in their book.
I was under the impression that it is quite common for anyone convicted of tech crimes to be barred from using computers. Chances are, if you're committing tech crimes you are mostly skilled in tech jobs, and being unable to use a computer deprives you of that work.
You would be surprised how easy it is to take out a modern American armada.
Major powers fighting proxy wars in third world countries worked out really well for Vietnam, Korea, Cuba, and Afghanistan.
1) Teachers who can't teach (even if they know their subject backwards and forwards) should be fired.
2) It should be possible for anyone with the proper qualifications to teach whether they have a "teaching certificate" or not.
Don't these two things sort of contradict eachother? Knowing something doesn't immediately make you capable of teaching it, and I imagine there are quite a few people out there who know quite a lot of things that they would not be able to teach if they were asked to. The reason people get teaching certificates (or other such things) is to show that they can, in fact, teach things they know to other people. I know a lot about computers, but I'll be damned if I can teach my family how to do anything other than check their email with one. It's quite a bit harder than you might expect, even with people who are just as intelligent as you. Teaching children, who don't have fully developed concepts of logic and reasoning, must be even more difficult.
I was looking for an answer to this.. and came up with an interesting article (from last year) about scientists basically doing exactly that.
Please god no duplicates. I work with these things, it's already enough of a pain in the ass with -illegal- duplicates.
The research suggests that the genetic predisposition causes the immune system to act different in response to the virus. If the research is correct, then yes you need both the genetic factor and the virus to get type-1 diabetes. Of course, that completely discounts any other possible methods of 'catching' the disease. Since it is an autoimmune disorder, there are likely multiple factors involved. If this pans out and cures the most common of those factors, it may still not eliminate the disease.
Type 1 diabetes comes with a lifetime requirement of insulin, syringes (or needles, for those nifty pens by novo nordisk), blood-sugar testers and their required test strips, and a small army of professional endocrinologists whose sole purpose is to tell people how to control their blood-sugar levels with as little insulin as possible to reduce risk of complications.
Type 2 diabetes comes with the occasional need for medications, a few doctor visits, and lifestyle changes.
I think you're confused.
Europe on that high horse, huh? When they put a release date on this, denmark your calendars.
Because if everything is equally cool, people will do the cool stuff that is easy instead of the cool stuff that is hard.
Instead, try to realize the truth. You will see it is not the space around the spoon that bends, it is only yourself.
Prior art: Windows Solitaire