[Spambayes] Spam at hackers conference

[Tim@mail.powweb.com]

I've *always* suspected that spambayes in combination with other technology would present a very powerful anti-spam arsenal.  But spambayes by itself is so 
good, that it may not really require supplemental technology.  I say *always* because I've only been in this game for a couple weeks... ;)  so what do I 
REALLY know?

- Tim

11/2/2002 5:01:22 PM, Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> wrote:

>At the "Hackers" conference (a cool west coast event by invitation
>only) there was a session on spam.  A few things to note:
>
>- The term "ham" is now generally accepted :-)
>
>- People are still at the Paul Graham level of Bayesian filtering;
>  I wish I had a blurb about the work done here on chi-square.
>
>- Combining different approaches (e.g. blacklists, whitelists,
>  Bayesian) seems to make people more comfortable.
>
>- The name of Bill Yerazunis was mentioned as someone who has done
>  good spam work.  Paul Graham seems to agree:
>  http://www.paulgraham.com/wsy.html ; one idea of his takes groups of
>  5 words and does various permutations (including leaving out some)
>  and then hashes on the result; very good results apparently.  (Maybe
>  the URL abouve has more info?)
>
>--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
>
>_______________________________________________
>Spambayes mailing list
>Spambayes@python.org
>http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes
>
>
>
>
- Tim
www.fourstonesExpressions.com