On 12/26/2003 1:05 PM, Philip Miller sent forth electrons to convey:
In terms of total computation necessary, sure, Bayesian is more
expensive than just about anything else. However, keep in mind
relative costs: bayesian filtering is often happening on the users'
desktops, or on a private mailserver where the load doesn't affect any
public services. Have you heard of any large corporations or ISPs
setting up individual Bayesian filters for each user and rejecting
mail at the MX using those filters? I certainly haven't.
Data point: Yahoo is trying and failing. To PAYING customers of
MailPlus ( http://mailplus.mail.yahoo.com/ , it includes SBC DSL and
dial-up customers) they claim you can "Train your personal spam filters
to recognize what /you/ consider spam" using the SpamGuard feature.
Except it doesn't work: when I try to train it on more than a handful of
spam at a time, it just times out. Yahoo Level 2 support worked on it
for a few weeks and claimed it was fixed, but it is still broken (it
fails to process/delete/train on the spam); they're supposed to be
working on it again. I did so and I still get about a dozen spam a day
to my yahoo account. After training on > 1000 spam, I still get about a
dozen spam a day to my yahoo account inbox. Caveat: nothing I've read
specifically states that spamguard is Bayesian, so it could be something
else.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg