Slashdot Mirror
Comparison of Bayesian POP3 Spam Filters
kreide writes "Spam e-mail has become an ever increasing problem, and these days it is next to impossible to use e-mail without receiving it in large amounts. Although various techniques exits to combat the problem, spammers seemed to be winning the war - until a new, powerful weapon appeared on the scene: Bayesian filters, our last, best hope for spam-free inboxes. In this review I compare POP3 based bayesian spam filters." We did an Ask Slashdot on this a few weeks ago.
I still believe that we should have a hunting season for spammers, just like we do for ducks...
Never underestimate the predictability of human stupidity...
How many people you know that email you 12 gifs/jpegs in one message with LARGE red text. ????
Lots of them. They're called 'girls' and Slashdot should encourage communication with them wherever possible.
Well actually got the Viagra and the penis enlargement pills... they work perfectly.
The problem is there were no instructions on how to find a partner.
I do not know how many times I have to tell people this.
They do not work. They just make your hand smaller.
filtering is no solution as long as there's no way to stop the spammers!
Or would you say that ignoring the corpses in the gutters would be a solution to the problem of violence on the streets?
Your analogy is slightly flawed. In the case of spam, it would be correct if:
On my system, SpamAssassin kills 99% of the Spam, carries it outside, buries the remains in the spam folder and cleans away the bloodstains on the floor. The less I get in touch with spam, the better.
In the perfect world, there would be a "nuke obnoxious netizen" button on my keyboard. But alas, we have to settle for slightly less efficient methods.