[linux-elitists] (tmda) Re: Constraining Bogus challenges.

Larry M. Augustin lma@lmaugustin.com
Tue Sep 23 11:17:34 PDT 2003

Karsten M. Self wrote:
> on Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 03:22:50PM -0600, Jason R. Mastaler
> (jason@mastaler.com) wrote:
> > "Karsten M. Self" <kmself@ix.netcom.com> writes:
> >
> > > Bollux.  There are existing content/context based filters which
> > > discriminate between spam and non spam with better than 98%
> > > accuracy, and less than 0.02% false positive rates.

This is a great example of lying with statistics.  I've done an extensive
cross-product survey of content/context filtering, and on average the
numbers are no where near that.

I don't doubt that there exist people on this mailing list who have
carefully tuned setups fitting their individual tastes that are able to
achieve those rates.  However, for the non-technical user the tweaking
necessary to achieve that level of accuracy is not an option.  For the
typical user of anti-spam systems based on content/context filtering,
accuracy is more like 75%.

Just because a technology proof of concept can be done where accuracy is
98%, doesn't mean that the rest of the world can achieve 98% accuracy.  To
claim that it does, is just as disingenuous as you feel are the claims of
C-R advocates.


More information about the linux-elitists mailing list