Slashdot Mirror
New Algorithm Recognizes Both Good and Bad Fake Reviews (thestack.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Researchers from the university of Sao Paolo have developed an algorithm able to identify both good and bad online reviews in the massive daily chatter of millions of peer-community posts, and in lateral mendacities at social network sites such as Google+ and Facebook reposts and 'likes'. Two of the datasets tested in the research were from Amazon, which has a vested interest in restoring the reputation of its community reviews, and has recently taken action on the matter.
With Siskel and Ebert now gone, my bot is picking up the slack: it gives this concept two thumbs down.
While I have spent a lot of time studying algorithms, I still like to look for new algorithms from time to time. This algorithm is definitely one of the better algorithms I have come across in my life.
When I first started studying the algorithm, I wasn't sure whether it was for me. However, after the first few pages, the algorithm began to grab my attention, and soon I was finding its average and worst case complexity and formally proving the correctness of several subroutines. I was astounded to find that it was at least as good as all the other algorithms I'd found over my twenty years' experience.
While I wouldn't recommend this algorithm to a beginner without guidance, the journeyman will soon find themselves reaching master by applying this algorithm. The master cannot fail to learn something new from it.
New Algorithm Recognizes Both Good and Bad (Fake Reviews): The algorithm recognizes good fake reviews and bad fake reviews, but not real reviews.
New Algorithm Recognizes Both Good and (Bad Fake) Reviews: The algorithm recognizes good reviews and bad fake reviews, but no real bad reviews or fake good reviews.
New Algorithm Recognizes Both (Good and (Bad Fake) Reviews): The algorithm recognizes a particular good review and a particular bad fake review.
New Algorithm Recognizes Both (Good and Bad (Fake Reviews)): The algorithm recognizes a particular good review and a particular bad review.
New Algorithm Recognizes Both Good and Bad Fake Reviews: The algorithm recognizes ruthlessly pedantic slashdot comments.
Why can't we just have moderation? Most of the poor (low quality, as opposed to negative) reviews are easy to spot; knuckleheads that break things two seconds after they get it out of the package; half the things they buy are mysteriously "DOA." Moderation enables your smart customers to punish your idiot customers.
Just spotted one of these today on eham.net. A beautiful hand made band pass filter rated 4.2/5 instead of the 5/5 it deserves because — years ago — some moron used it on the wrong band for the wrong purpose and rated it 0/5.
Just return true all the time. Sure there will be a few false positives but not enough to throw the results off by much.
It combines orgasmic whitefish essences and loud mustard overtones with a stale nacho aftertaste.
Part of what makes me come back to Amazon's site to buy products is the humorous fake reviews for things that are absurdly expensive or seems like it shouldn't exist.
tug o' war
If you haven't seen this, there is a service that looks at reviews to find if they are fake or not: http://fakespot.com/ From what I can gather about them, they also use clustering algorithms to detect the fake Amazon reviews.
actually "Universidade de São Paulo", located in the city and state of the same name. I get that you anglophones don't go well with tildes [and for that you are excused], but don't change so drastically the name of my town/state.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDm1xD_Kwyc
The only way Amazon could restore the reputation of their reviews would be to change from the bad it's always been to something better (because it couldn't get any worse), then make it bad again.
*** this post has been recognized as fake and removed by the new automatic fake post identifier ***
Well, you're obviously trolling, at least a little, but still deserve a reply. Any deterministic algorithm can be bested simply by determining what the algorithm does and then doing something different. So, yes, this isn't actually going to work as a permanent solution. It may work on past reviews, it may work for some time in the future, and it may work against those unwilling to put an effort into their work. However, someone will, almost certainly, and find the flaws. There is a technical term for this but, suffice to say, it boils down to there being no such thing as a free lunch.
Maths, explained conceptually, are a good thing. *nods* I'm not good at analogies but think of it like a law. No law can be without loopholes or it would be draconian and not have a desirable outcome. Yet, each loophole have potential abuses. There is no such thing as a perfect law which will give you ideal results in all situations.
Or, if you'd prefer, an automobile that is optimized for efficiency will not be good for hauling around extra weight - it will even be less efficient than an automobile designed to carry such a load. One can not create an automobile that will function ideally in all situations. Even if you could create such a thing, someone would just come along with a different use-case where such failed. It may take someone a moment to find that use-case but it will happen.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
"Everyone who does use HOSTS files (myself included) doesn't use your software" - by dave420 (699308) on Thursday November 05, 2015 @07:30AM (#50869743)
A small sampling of /.'ers say my work is good who use my hosts file engine quoted:
---
"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)
"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)
"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)
"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)
... apk
---
* So, what's that you said I have quoted above Dave420? LMAO... you FAIL as usual, again, vs. me!
APK
P.S.=> So much for that - enjoy your malnutrition from your "eating your words" diet (lol): EATING YOUR WORDS != GOOD NUTRITION... apk
"NOD32 detects a trojan in APK's HOSTS bullshit." - by Khyber (864651) on Saturday August 22, 2015 @01:02PM (#50370415)
VirusTotal & NOD32 SHOW CLEAN IN ITS EXES
https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
&
https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
There's only 2 exe's & 5 text files in it - The exe's are proven clean above in 2 links from VirusTotal & installer's a SFX rar (keeps it 2mb smaller) - that's NO virus per VIRSCAN http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...
(Unless YOU know way that .txt files are "viruses")
---
"he's tying to get your fucking information." - by Khyber (864651) on Saturday August 22, 2015 @01:02PM (#50370415)
My program doesn't transmit outward ONLY intake of data from 10 reputable security community sources!
---
"APK is apparently too fucking stupid to do this at the ROUTER level where it's most effective" - by Khyber (864651) on Saturday August 22, 2015 @01:02PM (#50370415)
You believe in "eggshell security" which fails-> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
COMPETENT NETWORK ADMINS DO MORE THAN PERIMETER SECURITY @ ROUTER LEVEL - they get bushwhacked ALL THE TIME in DNS hijacks!
(Right down to endpoints level in PC workstations also using tools you already have in hosts + firewalls (vs. "piling on 'MOAR'" that's inefficient & not as effective in slower usermode browser addons)).
---
"Windows 10 has hardcoded IPs and bypasses HOSTs." - by Khyber (864651) on Saturday August 22, 2015 @01:02PM (#50370415)
Windows ONLY bypasses hosts files for Windows update (Win8 & below) & for tracking "telemetry" in Windows 10 (this is going to KILL Windows 10 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... ) - test it yourself, that removes it.
---
"Browsers can bypass HOSTs as well." - by Khyber (864651) on Saturday August 22, 2015 @01:02PM (#50370415)
WTF? They'd be bypassing the IP stack if hostname is used ala http://slashdot.org/ (not http://216.34.181.45/ hosts are part of it - not impossible!
APK
P.S.=> "EAT YOUR WORDS" Khyber... apk
"I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)
It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
&
More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...
---
MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...
APK
P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:
"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)
"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)
"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)
"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)
... apk
"I know HOSTs is fucking useless in the first place" - by Khyber (864651) on Thursday October 29, 2015 @10:13AM (#50824745)
See subject: Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...
Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...
MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...
---
"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)
"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)
"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)
"Actually, APK is totally right on this count. Adblock Plus on Firefox mobile is a dog on older, or lower end, phones. A hostfile based adblocker makes for a much better experience in this context. Of course, your phone has to be rooted, which isn't the case with Firefox + adblock." - by chihowa (366380) on Saturday May 16, 2015 @11:40AM (#49705641)
"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)
---
YOU FAIL as always.
APK
P.S.=> Khyber - HOW MANY TIMES HAVE I BLOWN YOUR DOORS OUT ON HOSTS?
A classic's here in one where you said NOD32/ESET says my ware is a virus?
~60 antivirus programs show otherwise & NOD32 doesn't ->
http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...
(Too many times, that's only 1 sample & shows you're a damned liar... I can put up TONS if you like, just ask...)
...apk
"Chrome has thankfully started warning users who try to download it." - by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @03:48PM (#49909947)
Google can try explaining it vs. proof my ware's CLEAN (from VirusTotal which GOOGLE owns, you stupid freak):
MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee who also has the source & verified it safe too) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...
&
It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
&
It's installer = clean per VIRSCAN http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...
* :)
In case you hadn't noticed it, like when you made your PUNY THREATS effetely *trying* to "blackmail me" on Hilton Hotels here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ?
You failed badly on all accounts.
APK
P.S.=> Especially funny is that you work for CLOUDWORDS (an advertiser affiliate of Marketo) which tips your hand & PROVED YOUR ILL MOTIVES for your stupidity, running away from this most of all -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
... apk
"uBlock is using 33MB of RAM" - by andymadigan (792996) on Friday June 12, 2015 @10:31PM (#49902053)
Inefficient: Hosts @ 3-11mb w/ current data & does things adblock variants can't & U RAN FROM IT http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... ).
UBlock uses 63++ MB & AdBlock = 128mb++ -> http://www.ghacks.net/2014/06/...
SCREENSHOT -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...
BEST UBlock's done = 38mb/ABP = 64mb -> http://www.extremetech.com/wp-... From http://www.extremetech.com/wp-...
* See 'p.s.' below - Says all (& I didn't do the saying!)
---
"which blocks more ads? Answer: uBlock/Adblock" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)
WRONG - "Almost ALL Ads Blocked"'s PAID NOT TO by default-> http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...
&
ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...
UBlock/Adblock = far less efficient on CPU & RAM (added messagepassing, SLOW usermode vs. hosts in kernelmode) & NEITHER does a fraction of what hosts do in more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity.
---
"your system blocks fewer ads" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)
See above: + hosts do MORE w/ less via 1st link above!
---
"I'm more than happy to spend an extra 1% of my computer's power to block far more ads than your shitty idea" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)
You're 'happy' being illogical & stupid?
AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU use inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...
+
ClarityRay defeats it & NOT hosts (clarityray BLOCKS addons via native browser methods).
---
YOU started it -> http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... & here too http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
I finished YOU WITH IT all above!
APK
P.S.=> Howard Stark in "Capt. America" - hosts (Cap's Shield) vs. AdBlock & variants (steel):
"It's stronger than steel & 1/3rd the weight"
So
"Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" & "eat your words"
... apk
"Nobody uses hosts files for security" - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @05:53PM (#49746865) FROM -> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...
SpyBot S&D does, I do, Hostsman does, & /. users do:
"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)
"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)
"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)
"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)
... apk
(+ I can put out ~160++ more too, just ask...)
---
NOD32/ESET's says hosts = good security http://slashdot.org/comments.p... as I "overturned" an expert on a false positive on my Hosts program who gave in!
MalwareBytes' employee VETTED it & hosts + RECOMMENDS it-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...
---
Mr. Oliver Day @ Symantec/Norton does: http://www.securityfocus.com/c...
Bouldin denied it:
"I don't see Oliver Day of SecurityFocus on there" - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @08:43PM (#49747763) FROM-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...
APK
P.S.=> You fail Bouldin BOULDERHEAD... apk
https://xkcd.com/810/
Long live the Speaker Bracelet
Rolo D. Monkey
"The adblock plus lists are... more efficient than having the system parse 500kB+ host files every time there's a dns lookup"- by epyT-R (613989) on Wednesday May 27, 2015 @11:11PM (#49788007)
Tell us how 'efficient' almost all ads blocked is using 4++gb of RAM & 100% CPU -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... & ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...
OK? You FAIL...
APK
P.S.=> Some 'efficiency' that, along with the fact Deny this too AdBlock's SLOWER than hosts: http://superuser.com/questions...
... apk
"Your source code is shit and you know it" - by fisted (2295862) on Tuesday October 20, 2015 @09:04PM (#50770245)
See subject: Where's yours others here like & Malwarebytes folks host + recommend http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...
+ they have source to? LOL, it's not!
I'm NOT obligated to give away MY work to be misused as Chrome's was-> http://it.slashdot.org/story/1... which you ADMIT I'm not http://it.slashdot.org/comment...
---
"I'm highly satisfied by the amount of butthurt I apparently caused you by simply asking for the source code to your malware" - by fisted (2295862) on Sunday October 25, 2015 @12:19PM (#50797625)
It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
&
Its installer's clean per VirScan http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...
---
"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)
"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)
"APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)
"his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)
APK
P.S.=> You FAIL Fisted - write your own code (you probably can't for SHIT), you're not getting mine... apk
And yet spam email detection has got so good that I almost never get a spam.
And my ad-blocker is so good that I almost never see an ad.
So I don't think much to your theory of inevitable defeat.
No? Then why'd you use the word "almost?" Did you block APK's ad yet? Does your spam filtering never get a false positive, never let spam through?
And no, it's not my theory. You could see it as an off-shot of things like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
It's a pretty basic idea and doesn't really require that you agree with it. If you can prove them wrong then, well, you'd be famous.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Because almost is very useful. If a site like Amazon can kill 99% of fake reviews that's an extremely worthwhile thing to do. It doesn't have to be perfect.
And spam filtering does a hell of a lot better than 99% these days. I honestly can't remember when I last got a real email spam. It may be years.
And no, it's not my theory. You could see it as an off-shot of things like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..
Then either it's a crap theory or you are misusing it. But there's no fame in pointing out that spam filtering works. It's surprising you haven't realised it.
"Your hosts file comments are not trustworthy" - by omnichad (1198475) on Friday August 09, 2013 @11:22AM (#44520759)
See subject: MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee who has seen & verified its sourcecode too no less as safe) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...
&
MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus (per this VERY recent testing of them all) -> http://www.av-test.org/en/news...
&
It's GUARANTEED safe & clean (per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently) in BOTH its 64-bit model -> https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
& It's installer = safe/clean too -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...
---
Tells us, omniweasel:
* HOW'S IT TASTE "EATING YOUR WORDS" flavored with your FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH ramming them down spiced with the BITTER TASTE of SELF-DEFEAT"?
LMAO...
Additionally - have some manners!
It's NOT POLITE to talk with your mouth full as you "eat your words" quoted above after all that proof to the contrary from reputable sources.
APK
P.S.=> Lastly: You also conceded MANY points on hosts to me & made huge mistakes vs. me here http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...
&
Here too http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...
LMAO @ U, "omniloser"... apk