Re: Spamassassin
On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 17:37:56 -0700, Tom <tb.nospam@comcast.net> penned:
> On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 11:44:12PM +0000, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
>> On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 15:41:29 -0700, Tom <tb.nospam@comcast.net> penned:
>> > On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 09:55:03PM +0000, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 16:54:49 -0400, Naitik Shah <naitik@gamebox.net> penned:
> [snip]
>> I'm not sure what you're asking here.
> [snip]
>
> The philosophical question has to do with fundamental limitations of
> axiomatic systems when applied to human behavior.
>
> I'm always on the lookout for "case evidence" for where an axiomatic
> system is able to fully determine human behavior. (The book discusses
> the failures of Walden 2 and the Soviet Union).
>
> The point is, there's something humans can do that's not expressible in
> a set of axioms. Everthing always comes down to pragmatism (i.e., I
> still have to scan it quickly but it's better than...)
>
Ah. Well in that case, part of my human behavior is that I won't trust
a spam-filter to be 100% accurate, even if it *has* been 100% accurate
in the past.
I definitely find routing spam to ~/mail/spam to be much better than
having it appear in my inbox. I hate it when I see that there's new
mail (yay! someone loves me!) and then discover that it's some piece of
crap mass-mailer who apparently thinks I'm a complete moron. Putting it
all in one place means I don't get the unpleasant discovery that my sour
apple jelly belly is really vomit-flavored.
--
monique
Please respond to the group OR to my email, but not both. (Group preferred.)
Reply to: