Spam-Filter-Free Options (Was: Computer repair shop)

[Tom Buskey]

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 3:07 PM, Bill McGonigle <bill at bfccomputing.com>
wrote:

> On May 6, 2008, at 18:35, VirginSnow at vfemail.net wrote:
>
> > Until we can write programs capable of passing the Turing
> > test, spam filters are destined to either (or both of):
> >
> >  (1) Let spam through, and/or
> >  (2) Block legitimate mail.
> >
> > The most accurate way of filtering spam is with that little key on the
> > keyboard labeled "Delete".
>
> I'm blocking about 13,000 spams destined for my personal mailbox on a
> daily basis.  I actually need to deal with 80-120 a day (some smarter
> procmail rules could cut that in half, I bet).
>
> Assuming I could process one spam per second, the 'delete key' method
> would cost me 3.6 hours per day.  My head would explode first.
>
> Rich people hire staff to filter their mail.  I can't afford that.  I
> wish I had a good AI to process my mail, but until then, I'll take
> the good over the absent perfect, and bump up DKIM on my TODO list.
>

I work at a large corporation with 10,000-20,000 employees.  I've heard that
over 75% of the email we receive is spam.  In 4 years I think I have less
then 10 spam emails.  I haven't had an issue with losing email either.

My google account does pretty well, but work does better.

One of the philosophies of Unix is that the 90% solution today is better
then the 100% solution RSN.  We'll never have a perfect spam filter, but
I'll settle for a 90% solution...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/attachments/20080506/3d569466/attachment.html