From: Charles Hixson Date: 2004-09-21T04:53:35+09:00 Subject: Re: Method improvement request .-- Austin Ziegler wrote: >On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 04:08:44 +0900, Charles Hixson > wrote: > > >>Markus wrote: >> >> >>>>A...d). >>>> >>>> >>>If it turns out you're using this to try to get past spam filters I >>>think a lot of us will be very disappointed. >>> >>> >>Well, since I plan to eventually release full sources...that may well >>happen if it's successful. Then again, it could probably also be used >>to sort spam from ham. >> >>I..gram. And possibly others. >> >>But the spam/ham problem is an arms race. I suspect that a final answer >>is impossible this side of individually tailored filters. Bayes is >>already a start at this, but it's just a start. To be really effective >>the filter will need to dip into the semantic level. (So far I'm pretty >>much staying at the syntactic level, because it's more tractable...but >>semantics will need to be added.) >> >> > >I wouldn't mind seeing a more portable (Ruby?) implementation of a >Dolby noise or Markov chain spam analysis routine. > >http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/04/02/24/0025219.shtml > >It seems that you're basically doing Markov chain analysis here. > >-austin > > Well, certainly not formally. But then I haven't gotten well started. Still, there does seem to be a lot of overlap in the "state space". I'll have to remember that for when I get hung up on how to proceed.