On Sun, 2009-08-02 at 23:50 -0700, monolit wrote:
> Good morning. The output of sa-learn --dump magic after bayes learning is +1
> nspam/nham. I tried the command several. times. I tried write the mail with
I did not ask for the difference. I asked for the output of the command.
> Subject: viagra; body: viagra and sent it from my first account to the my
> second account(score 0,4). Then I used sa-learn -spam for this mail. I wrote
As I told you before, there are *lots* of other tokens. Which differ
greatly between your self-written messages and spam. Measuring Bayes by
observing a single token is broken.
> the same mail and sent it from account one to the second. The mail gain
> higher score 2.4. I took this mail and used sa-learn -spam. I wrote the same
> mail and repeat the sending(From 1. account to the second). The score was
> again higher 3.4. I tried it still several times but the score didnt grow...
> Thats was my small experiment with scoring by bayes.
Without looking at the headers and the SA rules hit, there's no evidence
Bayes did anything at all. As described, this easily could be AWL, too.
Oh my, this horse is dead anyway.
> Thank you for explanation how bayes works and for time which you devoted to
> me.
--
char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu...@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1:
(c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
