Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
User interfaces - yes!User interfaces - yes!Posted Feb 23, 2006 8:21 UTC (Thu) by davidw (subscriber, #947)In reply to: User interfaces by gdt Parent article: The Grumpy Editor's guide to bayesian spam filters
This is a very important point. As Linux heads towards the desktop, we need spam filters that can be trained by clicking on 'spam' 'not spam' buttons, ala Thunderbird.
Indeed, I would have liked to have seen Thunderbird included in this test - it too claims to have a Bayesian spam filter.
(Log in to post comments)
User interfaces - yes! Posted Feb 23, 2006 13:33 UTC (Thu) by bk (guest, #25617) [Link] I mostly disagree. Spam filtering is an upstream, mail-provider problem. Failing that, however (let's say you're stuck with a lax sysadmin who doesn't care about the spam flooding his/her users), it is good to have a fallback like MUA filtering.
User interfaces - yes! Posted Feb 23, 2006 13:55 UTC (Thu) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link] Except that training, an essential component of spam filtering these days, is a downstream, user problem.I think that ALL spam filtering should occur on the server, before the message queue. This just solves so many problems. However, training necessarily requires user interaction, and therefore should be supported in the MUA. True, there are web-based hacks, like in dspam, to try to work around this but just try explaining them to a clueless user!
|
|||||||||||||