What's wrong with Victor's approach to spam

John R. Levine johnl at iecc.com
Fri Jan 2 13:03:13 EST 2004

 [ probably not for publication ]

>> .... The filter's detection rate against this RBL pre-screened
>> sample is ~90%, the false positive rate is less than 0.01%. So we get rid
>> of ~99.5% of spam with no hash-cash. This is good enough. I am not about
>> to implement any CPU burning stamp generators any time soon.
>Somehow, my personal emails are always part of that "false positive
>rate" among self-satisfied anti-spammers like Victor.

Oh, no, not John Gilmore's "God told me to leave my relays open and
you're evil for not eating my spam" argument again.  Please, can we
not do that?


[Moderator's Note: and on that note, I'm ending the spam discussion
for now. --Perry]
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo at metzdowd.com

More information about the cryptography mailing list