Just wanted to verify a line of thinking I was planning to include in the overview doc. We have to give some indication to verifiers on how to use the information.
I think that it is important to point out that you are not going to get good results from naïve learning schemes and make sure that there is sufficient coverage there to defend against the objection. > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Fenton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 3:12 PM > To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip > Cc: J.D. Falk; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Bayesian filters are the pits > > While an interesting topic, this seems only peripherally > related to DKIM and I wonder whether a different venue, such > as the ASRG list, would be more appropriate. > > -Jim > > Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: > > I think that I am working towards a rather broader critique > of the way that SpamBayes &ct. are applied. > > > > Naïve Bayesian learning schemes are intrinsically > vulnerable to counter-programming. They work on a small scale > only because there is not a sufficient value to counter-programming. > > > > ... > > > > _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
