Microsoft requires that PC's sold as certified for for Windows 8 allow you to enter custom mode and load your own certs.
Emphasis mine. Can anyone provide a source for this statement? Thus far, I can only find statements where Microsoft does not mind if users are granted an ability to add their own certs - I have not seen this as a requirement to be Windows 8 certified.
Hardware makers who choose the optional Microsoft Certification will be required to implement UEFI. Microsoft will also require that manufacturers offer the ability to turn off the secure boot feature on x86 hardware[80], but they must not offer such an option on ARM hardware. No mandate is made regarding the installation of third-party certificates that would enable running alternate software.[81][82][83]
Same with Netflix. I have sympathy for the deaf, but private business does not have to change to accommodate their disadvantage.
Netflix is not a private business - it is a publicly traded corporation. Also, they offer their services to the public. Netflix (as well as any business and individual) benefits from the infrastructure within our country, especially the Post Office and the internet, funded by tax payers. All businesses that are owned by a corporation here in the US are only real entities thanks to government fiat, ergo all corporations are beholden to our government, and all businesses succeed thanks in part to our infrastructure. One of the agreements placed on businesses to continue to exist in our country is that they follow our laws, and sometimes we ask them to do things that might not be profitable in order to help with the common good - like the Disabilities act, or child labor laws, or environmental protection laws that keep everybody from shitting up the rivers.
This is an end run to keep future "broadcast television" from ignoring the needs of the deaf. If this is not settled now, it becomes more difficult to settle this in the future, and IMO it would be horrible if all future streaming services failed to deliver content with CC. If you feel that an allergy to certain foods is the same as being deprived of one of your senses (and such should be equally "protected" under the law), then you can never be reasoned with.
I've been using.mac since its release, and I haven't had any issues whatsoever regarding lost email. I have had syncing issues in which my address book gets doubled up on one of my systems, but a deletion and resync has always fixed it. So yeah - I call your anecdote with my anecdote.
Um - since when was Apple convicted of abusing the monopoly position of Mac OS?
Since when was Apple convicted of abusing the monopoly position of the iPhone?
So yeah - Apple is a bit different - they aren't a company who was convicted of abusing monopoly powers in the EU for starters.
the TSA has contrived an insane screening process whereby a handicapped American citizen, who could never be a threat to anyone, is subjected to an intensive check of all body cavities.
The handicapped thing of obviously out of line. The message if purposeful I think - 'nobody is exempt'.
I think you hit the nail on the head - if I was a terrorist in charge of recruiting, and I noticed that elderly who appear feeble or other handicapped people were afforded relaxed screening techniques, I know what physical appearance the next round of bombing madpersons would have.
That's a silly example. "Linux" has a "known brand" awareness to it, though I don't know if it's trademarked or not.
You are correct - Linux has been trademarked - I'm sure trademark laws are likely to grant more rights to the holder, compared to copyrights. Funny thing, I thought about that fact after posting.
Do keep in mind that the "known brand awareness" that you speak of applies to the kernel - not to browsers, databases, 3d modeling programs, etc. Also, I wonder if that "known brand awareness" applies to the distributions - like RedHat Linux, Suse Linux - IIRC, if one doesn't defend a trademark, it becomes property of the public domain - could this angle be exploited?
Also, I wonder if an argument can be made that "oracle" is a generic term - I don't think they have a browser.
It's like saying Apple can't use "Logic" because there's a computer quiz game called "Logic!"
They really have to compete in the same space. And no, "software" isn't a space.
Cool - how's about you and I make an open sourced web browser - we'll call it the Linux browser - after all, the kernel and a web browser isn't in the same space, and software isn't a space!
Ahh yes - Christians, the people who rely more on faith - the definition of which is (according to KJV): "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen (Hebrews 11:1)"
Yeah, faith, the definition which sounds surprisingly familiar with - neigh, exactly like - wishful thinking.
The burden of proof still rests on the positivists. You see, I do not think that wishful thinking makes something real. In order for me to believe extraordinary claims (like Jesus' virgin birth, Moses parting the sea, etc), I require extraordinary proof. A few unchecked little tidbits in a slashdot post isn't quite the proof I seek:)
What's this have to do with the topic? OF COURSE I'M TROLLING!!!!
There is a non-zero probability that one of these blackholes could eat a particle, then another and another and the next thing you know: poof. In a few weeks the moon will orbit a black hole.
Ok - first of all, the gravitational effect from these black holes would be small - since, well, they're being made by particles from earth, their gravitational effect on the surrounding environment would be about the same as however much matter was compressed down to form the particular black hole. Also, note that the radius is is much smaller than than the nucleus of an atom.
Now, since the gravitational effect of these mini holes is neglible, compared to the earth's, they won't go sucking all the matter around them like a vacuum cleaner. If they aren't totally unstable, as predicted by Hawking, and they linger, their effects will be small. Think about it - they will either fall inward towards the earth's core, and occasionaly eat some particles, or they will fly out in to space, eating an occasional particle.
Remember - matter here on earth is made up of mostly empty space - if we took a carbon nucleus, and expanded it to the size of a football field, then placed it in the center of the earth, the electrons would be orbiting at the earth's surface. There is a _lot_ of empty space for these mini black holes to travel through - never mind the relative distances between molecules.
All the more reason for a Mars Base, IMHO...
Having said all this, I do agree with you on the Mars base. I personally doubt these mini black holes will have a catasrophic effect, but of course I can't prove it.
ahh - good catch. You see, I'm used to the Unix-like-OS world, where developing end user apps does not require root priveleges. I forgot that, in the Windows world, even end user apps need SYSTEM level access - which, of course, promotes good security... oh wait...;)
ok - they hired crappy sysadmins, and the result - crappy systems. Newsflash - hire crappy developers, and you get - crappy software. Seriously - what point are you trying to make?
I noticed that you completely disregarded the question - why do most developers need root access? I certainly understand this need for kernel/device driver development, but what about the other 95% of developers who are writing end user applications?
Not to sound like a dick, but, instead of buying Windows XP, one buys Windows 2000 as the reasonable alternative, and, in both cases, Microsoft takes the cash and throws it at more activation development/"services". Hmm - I doubt that scenario will convince Microsoft to abandon activation - especially if they stop supporting W2k after their next OS rolls out. What Windows alternative will exist then?
Of course, if people start to take a peak at MacOS X, *Linux, *BSD - GOOD! Actually, I hope the next version of Windows is so laden with activation/DRM/whatever hassles (and one cannot receive support on "old" activationless products), that everyone gets up in anger, shakes their collective angry fists, and shout "Damn you, GATES!!!!!!!" and goes on to download/buy alternatives. But, that's way too far in the future. My crystal ball's usually very cloudy with future events past 24 hours, so I don't know - but, my guts tell me that this won't be the case, and that most people will just roll over and take it. Yeah, I'm a bit pessimistic about my fellow (wo)man.
Now, as far as Photoimpact vs Photoshop is concerned, I'll have to admit that my opinions on these 2 products are irrelevant, since I'm not a graphics twidget. Heh - when have irrelevant opinions stopped me from spouting off in the past:) A few Googles later, it would appear to software reviewers with Photoshop experience (which is the target audience for Photoimpact - this is the target audience that they will have to convice to switch over if they want to succeed) surmise that Photoimpact would be a very good choice for someone who wants some high end features at a very good price. However, it appears that Photoshop's big advantage in this arena would be in it's ease of use (remember, whether this is true or not, perception is reality for these people) and I think most people will stick with Photoshop in the near future even with this activation crap rolled in - but, I really hope I'm wrong and that people vote with their dollars for Photoimpact. Again - I'm just a pessimist when it comes to my fellow (wo)man.
parent post: the potential money you save by hindering piracy minus the lost sales due to pissed off customers => positive or negative?
first reply: It will always be negative. Always.
Will it always be negative? I agree that, if there is a reasonable alternative (think Turbo Tax, and all the other tax software alternatives), it will definitely be negative. However, in the event that there is no reasonable alternative (whether real or perceived, remember, perception is reality), like, say, Windows XP, Office or Adobe Photoshop, will sales be negatively affected by activation? I mean, yeah yeah Linux/MacOSX/Gimp r0x0rs (and I for one would be a self proclaimed Linux/MacOX fanboy), but seriously - has Microsoft reported fewer sales of Windows XP due to activation? For Office? I know that Adobe's latest Photoshop with the activation is new (I don't think the prior version had activation, though I welcome corrections here), so we won't see for a bit if they experience reduced sales due solely to activation. Now, in the context of this article, I do believe that Norton will receive some backlash since there are several known alternatives. But, I think Microsoft and Adobe are safe, for now.
gotta feed the trolls:
Where I won't have QuickTime popping up urging me to "go PRO for $29.99" when I've just spent my kidney, my arm and my leg on a new cool PowerMac G5.
Quicktime does come with the Mac OS (both classic and OS X based) install CD's. But guess what - you do not have to run them. You can turn off the plugins within whatever browser you're using.
Where the default DVD player won't allow me to play videos fullscreen without kludges.
Umm - granted, I've only used the DVD player for OS X 10.2 and 10.3, so I cannot comment on previous versions, but - mine seems to do full screen DVD's by default. I honestly don't know where you came up with this information.
Where there's only one half-baked limited shareware program that provides multiple workspaces.
I cannot comment on this, as I never felt an overwhelming need to use multiple desktops. Also, with 10.3, Expose has pretty much removed any lingering desires for multiple desktops (yeah yeah, $129). But, if multiple desktops are fully needed, use that kludge, or read on.
Where I have no choice of turning off the glittery bells & whistles interface.
Actually, you can do just that - you can have Mac OSX 10.1 - 10.2 (and likely 10.3 also, but I haven't seen this confirmed) boot up with just a frame buffered console, or you can load XFree86 (not the one supplied with Apple, since that one only runs rootless - you will have to roll your own), turn off Apple's interface, roll your own Gnome, KDE, fvwm, whatever desktop, and have that presented as your interface. I know that very few people would do this, but I just take issues with your saying "no choice". Oh - and both Gnome and KDE are, as I'm sure you are fully aware, able to do multiple desktops.
Where I won't have to buy a $129 OS upgrade every year.
Nobody is forcing anyone to pay $129 on the OS upgrade. 10.2 did not become obsolete overnight - it still works the same as it did a year ago, with the exception of patches and updates since then. If one is happy with 10.2, they can certainly stick with it.
why should software be treated differently than other products?
Hard products (cars, trains, planes, radio's, tv's, etc.) are created using scientific principles that have, for a large part, existed for hundred's of years. Think of any of these products as tests against these theories. Though there are some theories that are newer, they typically don't change the results from former theories by a large enough degree that we've had to completely scrap the old ideas (Newton vs. Einstein comes to mind - we can still make planes based on Newtonian physics even though Einstein's is "more correct").
Soft products on the other hand aren't directly affected by the aforementioned theories - granted, a computer won't work if there's no electricity, and computer's will give errors if the processor is overheating, etc. But, largely, soft products are governed by a set of principles that have existed for only decades (yes, they are derived from mathematical theories, but I think we can agree that they have gone in directions that are far removed from just 30 years ago). Think of assembler, C, your favorite language(s), etc. as some of these base theories, and any software we write as tests against those theories (heh - it wouldn't be too far of a stretch to say that GNU/Linux and Window's XP are different universes with their own sets of theories). Also, changes on these "base theories" can change the landscape enough that we have to completely scrap the old ideas. Trying to compile C code with Java comes to mind.
In my opinion, the Software Industry is very new compared to other industries. Also, I feel that the Software Industry is based on theories that change too often compared to other industries in which the theories are typically changing minutely (I'm not talking about the business landscape here - I'm just talking about making widget x, y, or z). The Software Industry should someday be held to the same standards as other industries, but in my opinion only if/when these "changes to base theories" slows down dramatically.
Re:They are not just going after the spammers
on
AOL Sues Spammers
·
· Score: 1
If a company pays a spammer and but can risk being sued then they will think twice before paying them to spam. They will look for more
ethical ways to advertise their products
.
LOL - Is there such a thing as ethically advertising products? This shoulda been +5 funny
Anyway, how do you think they are detecting NAT/PAT?
Here's a link that outlines one possible way, which was slashdot'ed a while ago
Is there any way to stop this detection?
The best way I could come up with is to obfuscate the number of clients behind your NAT - use one of the BSD/Linux firewalls, and the only external communications from any of your clients would be via a proxy server on the firewall - squid with some of the anonymous settings (turning off User Agent, having generic plugins defined, etc etc etc) comes to the top of my mind. Of course, this would potentially keep any of your client systems from being able to do non-proxied communications. I don't know - any other ideas out there?
Ultimately, yes, the Universe seems doomed to cool down indefinitely. The Universe is expanding, and it seems that it isn't going to stop;
According to several cosmological models, our universe's current rate of expansion seems to be on a knife edge between expanding forever and recollapsing. To determine the fate of our universe, physicists have estimated the amount of matter in the observable universe and the rate of expansion. If the amount of matter in the universe is greater than a certain amount (proportional to the rate of expansion), then gravity will eventually cause a recollapse.
Current estimates places the amount matter at about 10 to 15 percent of the necessary amount to cause a recollapse. Most physicists appear to feel comfortable with the "expanding forever" scenario, however most would admit that there may be a lot of unobserved matter out there.
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft requires that PC's sold as certified for for Windows 8 allow you to enter custom mode and load your own certs.
Emphasis mine. Can anyone provide a source for this statement? Thus far, I can only find statements where Microsoft does not mind if users are granted an ability to add their own certs - I have not seen this as a requirement to be Windows 8 certified.
Hardware makers who choose the optional Microsoft Certification will be required to implement UEFI. Microsoft will also require that manufacturers offer the ability to turn off the secure boot feature on x86 hardware[80], but they must not offer such an option on ARM hardware. No mandate is made regarding the installation of third-party certificates that would enable running alternate software.[81][82][83]
Emphasis mine. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_8#Secure_boot
Same with Netflix. I have sympathy for the deaf, but private business does not have to change to accommodate their disadvantage.
Netflix is not a private business - it is a publicly traded corporation. Also, they offer their services to the public. Netflix (as well as any business and individual) benefits from the infrastructure within our country, especially the Post Office and the internet, funded by tax payers. All businesses that are owned by a corporation here in the US are only real entities thanks to government fiat, ergo all corporations are beholden to our government, and all businesses succeed thanks in part to our infrastructure. One of the agreements placed on businesses to continue to exist in our country is that they follow our laws, and sometimes we ask them to do things that might not be profitable in order to help with the common good - like the Disabilities act, or child labor laws, or environmental protection laws that keep everybody from shitting up the rivers.
This is an end run to keep future "broadcast television" from ignoring the needs of the deaf. If this is not settled now, it becomes more difficult to settle this in the future, and IMO it would be horrible if all future streaming services failed to deliver content with CC. If you feel that an allergy to certain foods is the same as being deprived of one of your senses (and such should be equally "protected" under the law), then you can never be reasoned with.
I've been using .mac since its release, and I haven't had any issues whatsoever regarding lost email. I have had syncing issues in which my address book gets doubled up on one of my systems, but a deletion and resync has always fixed it. So yeah - I call your anecdote with my anecdote.
Um - since when was Apple convicted of abusing the monopoly position of Mac OS? Since when was Apple convicted of abusing the monopoly position of the iPhone? So yeah - Apple is a bit different - they aren't a company who was convicted of abusing monopoly powers in the EU for starters.
But didn't Apple spend a whole ton of money to write and maintain Mac OS X?
Ever heard of BSD?
Because BSD looks and runs exactly like Mac OS X - I know I can't spot the difference between the two running side by side ^_^
the TSA has contrived an insane screening process whereby a handicapped American citizen, who could never be a threat to anyone, is subjected to an intensive check of all body cavities.
The handicapped thing of obviously out of line. The message if purposeful I think - 'nobody is exempt'.
I think you hit the nail on the head - if I was a terrorist in charge of recruiting, and I noticed that elderly who appear feeble or other handicapped people were afforded relaxed screening techniques, I know what physical appearance the next round of bombing madpersons would have.
You are correct - Linux has been trademarked - I'm sure trademark laws are likely to grant more rights to the holder, compared to copyrights. Funny thing, I thought about that fact after posting.
Do keep in mind that the "known brand awareness" that you speak of applies to the kernel - not to browsers, databases, 3d modeling programs, etc. Also, I wonder if that "known brand awareness" applies to the distributions - like RedHat Linux, Suse Linux - IIRC, if one doesn't defend a trademark, it becomes property of the public domain - could this angle be exploited?
Also, I wonder if an argument can be made that "oracle" is a generic term - I don't think they have a browser.
They really have to compete in the same space. And no, "software" isn't a space.
Cool - how's about you and I make an open sourced web browser - we'll call it the Linux browser - after all, the kernel and a web browser isn't in the same space, and software isn't a space!
Yeah, faith, the definition which sounds surprisingly familiar with - neigh, exactly like - wishful thinking.
The burden of proof still rests on the positivists. You see, I do not think that wishful thinking makes something real. In order for me to believe extraordinary claims (like Jesus' virgin birth, Moses parting the sea, etc), I require extraordinary proof. A few unchecked little tidbits in a slashdot post isn't quite the proof I seek :)
What's this have to do with the topic? OF COURSE I'M TROLLING!!!!
Ok - first of all, the gravitational effect from these black holes would be small - since, well, they're being made by particles from earth, their gravitational effect on the surrounding environment would be about the same as however much matter was compressed down to form the particular black hole. Also, note that the radius is is much smaller than than the nucleus of an atom.
Now, since the gravitational effect of these mini holes is neglible, compared to the earth's, they won't go sucking all the matter around them like a vacuum cleaner. If they aren't totally unstable, as predicted by Hawking, and they linger, their effects will be small. Think about it - they will either fall inward towards the earth's core, and occasionaly eat some particles, or they will fly out in to space, eating an occasional particle.
Remember - matter here on earth is made up of mostly empty space - if we took a carbon nucleus, and expanded it to the size of a football field, then placed it in the center of the earth, the electrons would be orbiting at the earth's surface. There is a _lot_ of empty space for these mini black holes to travel through - never mind the relative distances between molecules.
All the more reason for a Mars Base, IMHO...
Having said all this, I do agree with you on the Mars base. I personally doubt these mini black holes will have a catasrophic effect, but of course I can't prove it.
ahh - good catch. You see, I'm used to the Unix-like-OS world, where developing end user apps does not require root priveleges. I forgot that, in the Windows world, even end user apps need SYSTEM level access - which, of course, promotes good security ... oh wait ... ;)
ok - they hired crappy sysadmins, and the result - crappy systems. Newsflash - hire crappy developers, and you get - crappy software. Seriously - what point are you trying to make?
I noticed that you completely disregarded the question - why do most developers need root access? I certainly understand this need for kernel/device driver development, but what about the other 95% of developers who are writing end user applications?
Of course, if people start to take a peak at MacOS X, *Linux, *BSD - GOOD! Actually, I hope the next version of Windows is so laden with activation/DRM/whatever hassles (and one cannot receive support on "old" activationless products), that everyone gets up in anger, shakes their collective angry fists, and shout "Damn you, GATES!!!!!!!" and goes on to download/buy alternatives. But, that's way too far in the future. My crystal ball's usually very cloudy with future events past 24 hours, so I don't know - but, my guts tell me that this won't be the case, and that most people will just roll over and take it. Yeah, I'm a bit pessimistic about my fellow (wo)man.
Now, as far as Photoimpact vs Photoshop is concerned, I'll have to admit that my opinions on these 2 products are irrelevant, since I'm not a graphics twidget. Heh - when have irrelevant opinions stopped me from spouting off in the past :) A few Googles later, it would appear to software reviewers with Photoshop experience (which is the target audience for Photoimpact - this is the target audience that they will have to convice to switch over if they want to succeed) surmise that Photoimpact would be a very good choice for someone who wants some high end features at a very good price. However, it appears that Photoshop's big advantage in this arena would be in it's ease of use (remember, whether this is true or not, perception is reality for these people) and I think most people will stick with Photoshop in the near future even with this activation crap rolled in - but, I really hope I'm wrong and that people vote with their dollars for Photoimpact. Again - I'm just a pessimist when it comes to my fellow (wo)man.
first reply: It will always be negative. Always.
Will it always be negative? I agree that, if there is a reasonable alternative (think Turbo Tax, and all the other tax software alternatives), it will definitely be negative. However, in the event that there is no reasonable alternative (whether real or perceived, remember, perception is reality), like, say, Windows XP, Office or Adobe Photoshop, will sales be negatively affected by activation? I mean, yeah yeah Linux/MacOSX/Gimp r0x0rs (and I for one would be a self proclaimed Linux/MacOX fanboy), but seriously - has Microsoft reported fewer sales of Windows XP due to activation? For Office? I know that Adobe's latest Photoshop with the activation is new (I don't think the prior version had activation, though I welcome corrections here), so we won't see for a bit if they experience reduced sales due solely to activation. Now, in the context of this article, I do believe that Norton will receive some backlash since there are several known alternatives. But, I think Microsoft and Adobe are safe, for now.
Quicktime does come with the Mac OS (both classic and OS X based) install CD's. But guess what - you do not have to run them. You can turn off the plugins within whatever browser you're using.
Where the default DVD player won't allow me to play videos fullscreen without kludges.
Umm - granted, I've only used the DVD player for OS X 10.2 and 10.3, so I cannot comment on previous versions, but - mine seems to do full screen DVD's by default. I honestly don't know where you came up with this information.
Where there's only one half-baked limited shareware program that provides multiple workspaces.
I cannot comment on this, as I never felt an overwhelming need to use multiple desktops. Also, with 10.3, Expose has pretty much removed any lingering desires for multiple desktops (yeah yeah, $129). But, if multiple desktops are fully needed, use that kludge, or read on.
Where I have no choice of turning off the glittery bells & whistles interface.
Actually, you can do just that - you can have Mac OSX 10.1 - 10.2 (and likely 10.3 also, but I haven't seen this confirmed) boot up with just a frame buffered console, or you can load XFree86 (not the one supplied with Apple, since that one only runs rootless - you will have to roll your own), turn off Apple's interface, roll your own Gnome, KDE, fvwm, whatever desktop, and have that presented as your interface. I know that very few people would do this, but I just take issues with your saying "no choice". Oh - and both Gnome and KDE are, as I'm sure you are fully aware, able to do multiple desktops.
Where I won't have to buy a $129 OS upgrade every year.
Nobody is forcing anyone to pay $129 on the OS upgrade. 10.2 did not become obsolete overnight - it still works the same as it did a year ago, with the exception of patches and updates since then. If one is happy with 10.2, they can certainly stick with it.
Hard products (cars, trains, planes, radio's, tv's, etc.) are created using scientific principles that have, for a large part, existed for hundred's of years. Think of any of these products as tests against these theories. Though there are some theories that are newer, they typically don't change the results from former theories by a large enough degree that we've had to completely scrap the old ideas (Newton vs. Einstein comes to mind - we can still make planes based on Newtonian physics even though Einstein's is "more correct").
Soft products on the other hand aren't directly affected by the aforementioned theories - granted, a computer won't work if there's no electricity, and computer's will give errors if the processor is overheating, etc. But, largely, soft products are governed by a set of principles that have existed for only decades (yes, they are derived from mathematical theories, but I think we can agree that they have gone in directions that are far removed from just 30 years ago). Think of assembler, C, your favorite language(s), etc. as some of these base theories, and any software we write as tests against those theories (heh - it wouldn't be too far of a stretch to say that GNU/Linux and Window's XP are different universes with their own sets of theories). Also, changes on these "base theories" can change the landscape enough that we have to completely scrap the old ideas. Trying to compile C code with Java comes to mind.
In my opinion, the Software Industry is very new compared to other industries. Also, I feel that the Software Industry is based on theories that change too often compared to other industries in which the theories are typically changing minutely (I'm not talking about the business landscape here - I'm just talking about making widget x, y, or z). The Software Industry should someday be held to the same standards as other industries, but in my opinion only if/when these "changes to base theories" slows down dramatically.
- ethical ways to advertise their products
.LOL - Is there such a thing as ethically advertising products? This shoulda been +5 funny
Here's a link that outlines one possible way, which was slashdot'ed a while ago
Is there any way to stop this detection?
The best way I could come up with is to obfuscate the number of clients behind your NAT - use one of the BSD/Linux firewalls, and the only external communications from any of your clients would be via a proxy server on the firewall - squid with some of the anonymous settings (turning off User Agent, having generic plugins defined, etc etc etc) comes to the top of my mind. Of course, this would potentially keep any of your client systems from being able to do non-proxied communications. I don't know - any other ideas out there?
According to several cosmological models, our universe's current rate of expansion seems to be on a knife edge between expanding forever and recollapsing. To determine the fate of our universe, physicists have estimated the amount of matter in the observable universe and the rate of expansion. If the amount of matter in the universe is greater than a certain amount (proportional to the rate of expansion), then gravity will eventually cause a recollapse.
Current estimates places the amount matter at about 10 to 15 percent of the necessary amount to cause a recollapse. Most physicists appear to feel comfortable with the "expanding forever" scenario, however most would admit that there may be a lot of unobserved matter out there.