Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Another Whack at Spam

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the problems-that-won't-be-solved-until-2006 dept.

mmoncur writes "Tim Bray just put up an article called Another Whack at Spam that has been getting some attention. It just looks like a variation of the old pay to send idea to me."

3 of 282 comments (clear)

  1. How could a pay mail service even work? by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I looked at the article, and I still don't see how payments would even work. I have to send a few emails a day -- so I'm paying pennies per day? That's ridiculous. Plus, there's already all this software that sends and receives email for free... it's all going to have to change. It's a herculean effort, and will still result in spam -- regular mail costs a ton in comparison, and I still get junk mail in there. Perhaps filters plus busting bad offenders will eventually make a good difference... just taking my name off of lists has helped me a great deal.

    --
    stuff |
  2. SPAM filter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The only viable solution to spam using the current infrastructure is learning algorithms such as Bayesian spam filters. (Would be interesting to see if similar techniques could be used to beat such spam filters and get spam through..)

    Trying to get everyone to change from SMTP to something else just isn't going to work. There is too much for an instant change. This principle is basically why we're still using IPv4.

  3. Mebbe learn to write a bayesian filter? by Nuclear+Elephant · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Tim fails to understand that he's still getting spam only for the reason that his Bayesian filter sucks. Most other Bayesian-style filters (and friends) are up to a 99.9% filter rate and working towards five-nines efficiency. Their learning potential continues to improve as well with new concepts such as inoculation. It's no longer a question of "can we filter spam" it's a question of "how do we stop that one in a thousand spams that get through"...and that's soon going to be one-in-ten thousand. The problem is that only a small number of people have actually done any research in this area and tried Bayesian-style filtering. If they did, they would realize it worked ... very effectively. There are also server-side tools that make it easy for the 95% of non-tech people on the Internet. Bottom line, Tim needs to quit his bichin and go rewrite his spam filter - or install someone else's.