Timeline for Can a machine be taught to flag spam automatically?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 9, 2021 at 4:35 | history | undeleted | SpockPuppet | ||
| Sep 9, 2021 at 4:35 | history | deleted | SpockPuppet | via Vote | |
| May 7, 2021 at 2:22 | comment | added | chivracq | @FerryBig ..., => Oops...!!: google.com/… | |
| Feb 28, 2017 at 10:55 | comment | added | MikeW | My first thought, was that it's not in principle to decide what is Spam unequivocally - since it can be crafted arbitrarily close to a genuine message - even so, the linked-to site (or keywords they use to direct you there via Google) will be noticeable / visible as Spam ! | |
| Feb 27, 2017 at 23:27 | comment | added | Klik | I don't think most spammers will due this due to the rule of diminishing returns. | |
| Feb 24, 2017 at 11:07 | comment | added | Nemo | en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BEANS | |
| Feb 23, 2017 at 16:49 | comment | added | ArtOfCode | @andybalholm Sure, there are always exceptions. But the vast majority of spammers here are dumb - we seem to cultivate an especially dumb breed of spammer, actually. | |
| Feb 23, 2017 at 16:06 | comment | added | andybalholm | @ArtOfCode, there are exceptions, though. I've dealt with a spammer who obviously read the spamassassin-users mailing list. I posted rules for blocking his spam; he shut down for a day or so, and came back with modified spam that didn't hit those rules. | |
| Feb 23, 2017 at 6:15 | comment | added | Robotnik | Regarding 'correct English sentences' - there's a theory that spammers/scammers are using mistakes deliberately in order to turn away anybody who is unlikely to be gullible enough to follow through with it. | |
| Feb 23, 2017 at 2:16 | comment | added | AJMansfield | This seems like it might be a interesting challenge to implement. | |
| Feb 22, 2017 at 20:36 | comment | added | Left SE On 10_6_19 | @Mego, be careful what you wish for. | |
| Feb 22, 2017 at 14:39 | comment | added | user307833 | We've seen cases where the spam links were put in comments instead of the question body. It wasn't very successful. If we can keep raising the bar for spammers, to the point where they have to make meaningful contributions... Mission accomplished. | |
| Feb 20, 2017 at 21:28 | comment | added | Ferrybig | Remember that comments are usually not indexed by google, so spammers won't win that much by it | |
| Feb 20, 2017 at 20:35 | comment | added | ArtOfCode | General rule: spammers are dumb. You can count on them to be dumb. Being intelligent takes time, which could be spent posting more spam. | |
| Feb 20, 2017 at 20:34 | comment | added | Mithical | Also note that the Charcoal sites will not have their SEO pushed up from this - SE specifically makes that not happen. | |
| Feb 20, 2017 at 20:03 | comment | added | Andy | No, I'm not concerned. Very few spammers will read this or look at the website or source code. The few that do are the ones that were already actively working to avoid detection anyway. | |
| Feb 20, 2017 at 20:02 | comment | added | ChrisF Mod | Spammers aren't usually that clever. We do see some people attempting to spam in comments, but not that many. We also see spammers occasionally posting apparently OK answers and then editing in spam later. Pretty much all of these attempts fail as people notice and flag them. | |
| Feb 20, 2017 at 20:01 | comment | added | ɥʇǝS | Don't give them any ideas :P (jk). That's actually an interesting proposal. | |
| Feb 20, 2017 at 19:59 | history | answered | SpockPuppet | CC BY-SA 3.0 |