[pLog-svn] r6088 - plog/branches/lifetype-1.2/class/security

[Jon Daley]

 	I think 1.2.6 is ready to release, though I guess it would be good 
to test my latest code to make sure I didn't break anything.

On Thu, 29 Nov 2007, Jon Daley wrote:

> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Mark Wu wrote:
>> Why can't we just put the bayesian filter in last order? it seems solve 
>> this
>> problem easier.
> 	Does that fix everything?  It is certainly the easiest (coding and 
> performance) wise.
> 	With my thinking it seems like that fixes it - at least for now, 
> because we don't have any other plugins that would use the inputs of others. 
> And we can maybe do Mark's priority idea if we ever need that sort of thing.
> 	As long as it works for Paul's stuff, I think that sounds good. So, 
> then we should take Mark's rev 6088 or whatever it is and use that, but 
> modify it to pass in the previouslyRejected flag, and then put the bayesian 
> at the end.
>
>> BTW,  most lifetype installations in CJK site does rely on Bayesian Filter 
>> to protect the spam attack. Because the tokenize algorithm can't separate 
>> CJK into each atomic token. We don't use stop words and "white space" to 
>> seperate a paragraph into "word".
> 	I am not sure what you are saying.  It seems like you are saying the 
> tokenizer doesn't work, so then it seems that the bayesian filter wouldn't be 
> very good at all...
>
> 	Well, it's been 10 minutes since I read your idea of simply putting 
> the bayesian filter at the end, and haven't come up with a reason why it 
> won't work.  So, probably good.  Do you want to do it, or me?
>
> -- 
> Jon Daley
> http://jon.limedaley.com/
>
> Whenever people agree with me I always feel I must be wrong.
> -- Oscar Wilde

-- 
Jon Daley
http://jon.limedaley.com/

Music is what feelings sound like.
-- Anonymous