On Fri, 10 Jan 2003, Jonathan M. Hollin wrote: > Matt Sergeant wrote: > > I've done a lot on bayes for spam (I had an effective bayesian filter before > > Paul Graham wrote his article on the subject), but there's not much in it > > for a full talk. Maybe a lightning talk. Hmm... > > That would be great Matt. > > Funny how Paul Graham has become so synonymous with Bayesian > probabilities isn't it? Your work preceeds his, Google "Page Rank" > apparently uses Bayesians (pre-Graham) and, here in the UK, Autonomy > (http://www.autonomy.com/) have been doing ground-breaking work for a > few years now with Bayesians at the core of their technology. Despite > this, Paul Graham is the first person people think of when you start to > talk Bayesians, I wonder why?
To be fair to Paul Graham, what he did was put it in a language that was accessible to geeks. Every single paper or book or whatever I've read on Bayesian probabilities talks in maths gobledegook (although I'm sure Ken Williams may disagree ;-). Paul Graham made it easy for the layman to grok and implement. A bayes lightning talk might be fun though. -- <!-- Matt --> <:->get a SMart net</:-> Spam trap - do not mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
