--On Tuesday, February 25, 2003 7:04 AM -0800 "Roger B.A. Klorese" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nick Simicich wrote: >> One thing about Bayesian spam filters (I use and contribute to >> bogofilter, which has performance as a goal, see >> http://bogofilter.sourceforge.net) is that they are typically tunable. > > So what? > > a) That takes work. I don't want to work at it. > b) That occurs aftyer false positives have happened. It's unacceptable to > me that they *ever* happen.
Well, then Roger is in a real bind, because there is absolutely no spam prevention measure that has been, is being, or could be implemented on any level whatsoever - from draconian intergalactic legislation to hiring the neighbor's kid to check your Inbox - that is incapable of generating a false positive. So reality is unacceptable. Fortunately, fantasy is always waiting. :)
