Talk:Bayesian poisoning

Contradiction
According to this entry:

If spam filters are trained using these emails, there is a much greater chance that they will also mark incoming non-spam emails as spam, due to similiarities between those and the literary sources used to generate the poisoned emails.

According to the external link http://www.zdziarski.com/papers/boudville.txt

No, it won't increase false positives - it will simply cause the filter to look at different characteristics of legitimate mail.

Would someone like to reconcile these conflicting viewpoints? I am inclined to believe the latter source, as it is not anonymous and posted on a world-editable piece of shit website. -76.209.56.104 11:34, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Bayesian poisoning and Wikipedia
Spammers have now started to use Wikipedia as a source for Bayesian poisoning in their spam messages. J I P | Talk 09:31, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Bayesian poisoning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061012080443/http://www.jgc.org/SpamConference011604.pps to http://www.jgc.org/SpamConference011604.pps
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130429141017/http://www.ceas.cc/2004/170.pdf to http://www.ceas.cc/2004/170.pdf
 * Added tag to http://www.ceas.cc/2005/125.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:09, 29 October 2016 (UTC)