Re: rules better than bayes?

[Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Matt Kettler writes:
> At 10:50 AM 1/10/2006, Chris Santerre wrote:
> 
> >I have long said that IMHO, I do not think bayes is worth it. Left 
> >unattended, it isn't as good. A simple rule can take out a lot of spam. 
> >Some may say rule writing is more complicated then training bayes. Maybe. 
> >Not so much the rule writing, but the figuring out what to look for and 
> >testing for FPs.
> 
> Interesting.. For me, BAYES_99 is right between SURBL and URIBL in terms of 
> hits. (And has 98.91% of URIBL's total hits) I find it completely 
> indispensable.

The thing is, Bayes is a tool for personalization -- and as such, its
effectiveness varies widely depending on what *you* do with it.

For what it's worth, I've *never* trained my current Bayes DB, and have
been running with it for about 6 months I think.  I get BAYES_00 on most
ham, and BAYES_99 on most spam.

But the 4 letters that matter with Bayes are:

    YMMV

;)

- --j.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh CVS

iD8DBQFDxAWfMJF5cimLx9ARAvvfAJwIiQQpAzBPYNEKnQiWLw4NMmxZewCfTxEg
qquh5FGGGQFwFU6TdOlIDi0=
=CcrR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re[2]: OT Humor: was rules better than bayes?

[Robert Menschel <Ro...@Menschel.net>]

Hello William,

Tuesday, January 10, 2006, 11:37:35 AM, you wrote:

>> But the 4 letters that matter with Bayes are:
>>    YMMV

WS>  	Isn't that an OTCBB Ticker symbol?  I heard they're about to go 
WS> through the _roof_!!

Your Milage May Vary, Inc.  I hear they're cornering the market on
automotive fuel saving devices and technologies.

Today's stock prices ranged from 2.159 to 2.259, or 2.359 for
preferred stock.

Re: rules better than bayes?

[William Stearns <ws...@pobox.com>]

Good evening, Justin, all,

On Tue, 10 Jan 2006, Justin Mason wrote:

> -----(Modified PGP heading)-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Matt Kettler writes:
>> At 10:50 AM 1/10/2006, Chris Santerre wrote:
>>
>>> I have long said that IMHO, I do not think bayes is worth it. Left
>>> unattended, it isn't as good. A simple rule can take out a lot of spam.
>>> Some may say rule writing is more complicated then training bayes. Maybe.
>>> Not so much the rule writing, but the figuring out what to look for and
>>> testing for FPs.
>>
>> Interesting.. For me, BAYES_99 is right between SURBL and URIBL in terms of
>> hits. (And has 98.91% of URIBL's total hits) I find it completely
>> indispensable.
>
> The thing is, Bayes is a tool for personalization -- and as such, its
> effectiveness varies widely depending on what *you* do with it.
>
> For what it's worth, I've *never* trained my current Bayes DB, and have
> been running with it for about 6 months I think.  I get BAYES_00 on most
> ham, and BAYES_99 on most spam.
>
> But the 4 letters that matter with Bayes are:
>
>    YMMV

 	Isn't that an OTCBB Ticker symbol?  I heard they're about to go 
through the _roof_!!
 	/me ducks...
 	Cheers,
 	- Bill

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
         "We don't want an election without a paper trail...all three
owners of the companies who make these machines are donors to the Bush
administration.  Is this not corruption?"
         -- Gore Vidal
(Courtesy of http://www.laweekly.com/ink/03/52/features-cooper.php)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
William Stearns (wstearns@pobox.com).  Mason, Buildkernel, freedups, p0f,
rsync-backup, ssh-keyinstall, dns-check, more at:   http://www.stearns.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------