From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,103b407e8b68350b
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-01-09 07:04:43 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: dennison@telepath.com (Ted Dennison)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Anybody in US using ADA ? One silly idea..
Date: 9 Jan 2003 07:04:42 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <4519e058.0301090704.28fa248e@posting.google.com>
References: 
 <C900921B7A3FDDD4.5FD752FF5D42F9AF.349D2214D482463F@lp.airnews.net>
 <3E147D79.2070703@cogeco.ca> <BA3A535D.177F%yaldnifw@blueyonder.co.uk>
 <ba162549.0301030124.237c7a7e@posting.google.com>
 <4519e058.0301031434.51a0c880@posting.google.com>
 <ba162549.0301040053.1e7dbedc@posting.google.com>
 <wmFR9.111225$Y86.101474@news2.central.cox.net>
 <zmHR9.253680$a8.123558@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>
 <81NR9.112823$Y86.60750@news2.central.cox.net>
 <dg8r1v04moq9bq8skl49lg5bepqbid2i0g@4ax.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.115.221.98
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1042124683 31020 127.0.0.1 (9 Jan 2003 15:04:43
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 9 Jan 2003 15:04:43 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:32826
Date: 2003-01-09T15:04:43+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

faust <urfaust@optushome.com.au> wrote in message news:<dg8r1v04moq9bq8skl49lg5bepqbid2i0g@4ax.com>...
> Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com> ,  emitted these fragments:
> 
> >If you don't have the latest alpha with the baesean spam filtering, you 

> Old technology.
> 
> Try Gnus with adaptive scoring.

(Chortle) Errr, no. That feature has been in Gnus since at least
version 5.3. That makes it at *least* 6 years old. The copyright in
the lisp source file for it dates back to '95, which indicates it may
be as much as 8 years old. Either way, I'm guessing it wasn't a new
idea back then either.

The Bayesian(sorry for the bad spellings before) method is, in part, a
*reaction* to the percieved problems with the various scoring methods.
I'm not closed-minded enough to think "old technology" is nessecarily
inferior. Hey, if it works for you, then great! But the fact is that
adaptive scoring is the "older technology".

I'd ask that anyone who feels impelled to go on about how inferior one
method is to the other (even against some useless yardstick like age)
at least learn a *little* about both methods first. I know that's not
traditional for Usenet posters, but I'm going to ask anyway.