Re: Why spam is a problem

I haven't had a chance to follow this thread entirely, so I apologize
if this has already been mentioned.  I ran across this in a coworker's
blog.  Being a fan of statistical techniques that provide reasonable,
cost-effective (but not necessarily perfect) solutions to difficult
problems, it appealed to me. :)

http://www.garyarnold.com/projects.php#bayespam

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: Why Spam is a problem, (continued) Re: Why Spam is a problem, Dave Crocker Re: Why Spam is a problem, John Stracke Re: Why Spam is a problem, Vernon Schryver Re: Why Spam is a problem, John Stracke Re: Why Spam is a problem, Vernon Schryver Re: Why Spam is a problem, David Morris Re: Why Spam is a problem, Valdis . Kletnieks Re: Why Spam is a problem, Eric A. Hall Re: Why Spam is a problem, Brian Bisaillon Re: Why Spam is a problem, Brian Bisaillon Re: Why spam is a problem, Greg Skinner <= SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org, william Re: SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org, Valdis . Kletnieks Re: SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org, william Re: SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org, Dave Crocker Re: SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org, william Re: SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org, John C Klensin MUST/SHOULD and related terminology, Martin Duerst Re: MUST/SHOULD and related terminology, Fred Baker Re: MUST/SHOULD and related terminology, C. M. Heard Re: SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org, John C Klensin

Previous by Date:	Re: writing congress about spam, Fred Baker
Next by Date:	Re: writing congress about spam, Peter Saint-Andre
Previous by Thread:	Re: Why Spam is a problem, Brian Bisaillon
Next by Thread:	SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org, william
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]