[linux-elitists] (tmda) Re: Constraining Bogus challenges.
Larry M. Augustin
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
> (email@example.com) wrote:
> > "Karsten M. Self" <firstname.lastname@example.org> 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
More information about the linux-elitists