Good evening, Justin, all,
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006, Justin Mason wrote:
-----(Modified PGP heading)-----
Hash: SHA1
Matt Kettler writes:
At 10:50 AM 1/10/2006, Chris Santerre wrote:
I have long said that IMHO, I do not think bayes is worth it. Left
unattended, it isn't as good. A simple rule can take out a lot of spam.
Some may say rule writing is more complicated then training bayes. Maybe.
Not so much the rule writing, but the figuring out what to look for and
testing for FPs.
Interesting.. For me, BAYES_99 is right between SURBL and URIBL in terms of
hits. (And has 98.91% of URIBL's total hits) I find it completely
indispensable.
The thing is, Bayes is a tool for personalization -- and as such, its
effectiveness varies widely depending on what *you* do with it.
For what it's worth, I've *never* trained my current Bayes DB, and have
been running with it for about 6 months I think. I get BAYES_00 on most
ham, and BAYES_99 on most spam.
But the 4 letters that matter with Bayes are:
YMMV
Isn't that an OTCBB Ticker symbol? I heard they're about to go
through the _roof_!!
/me ducks...
Cheers,
- Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We don't want an election without a paper trail...all three
owners of the companies who make these machines are donors to the Bush
administration. Is this not corruption?"
-- Gore Vidal
(Courtesy of http://www.laweekly.com/ink/03/52/features-cooper.php)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
William Stearns ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). Mason, Buildkernel, freedups, p0f,
rsync-backup, ssh-keyinstall, dns-check, more at: http://www.stearns.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
