Michael Tsai wrote:
Anyway, my intent is not to get religious over filter technologies. In the end, what matters is how well the filter works. I just want to dispell the myth that spammers can "pretty quickly work around" Bayesian filters. They've certainly tried, but they haven't been successful.
I agree with you on Bayesian filters. They are not easier for spammers to work around. I don't want to get in a religious fight over filter technologies either, and I agree with your clarificaton. The advantage of bayesian filters is that they are trained on the mail you receive. The advantage of the approach taken by Entourage is that it's trained on a very large sample size and doesn't require any work on the part of the user. We'll see how it compares in practice. Of course, comparing junk mail filters is also a complicated issue (kind of like performance testing).
Dan
--
To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
archives: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.letterrip.com/>
old-archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
