http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/ Engadget Comments for Spam Cube hardware filter reviewed http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/Mar 30th 2006 8:55PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/
SPAM is a trademarked name...]]>Mar 30th 2006 9:01PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed//
P.S. Please google "maths coprocessor" if you don't get the joke.]]>Mar 30th 2006 9:14PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/Mar 30th 2006 9:47PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/Mar 30th 2006 10:07PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/]]>Mar 30th 2006 10:15PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/Mar 30th 2006 10:21PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/Mar 30th 2006 10:24PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://digg.com/technology/Return_of_the_Math_Co-processor_AMD_says_maybe.

;)]]>Mar 30th 2006 10:30PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/Mar 30th 2006 11:03PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/Mar 30th 2006 11:30PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/
http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,125180,00.asp

NYTimes is always negative on a lot of new things, even some of the best gadgets like the slingbox (i love that thing)

]]>Mar 30th 2006 11:54PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/
This thing definitely has its perks and i won't be surprised if we see this company make a spam cube router soon, it's obvious.]]>Mar 30th 2006 11:59PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/
The product is definitely a hit or it wouldn't of made the front page of the biz section thats for sure!

For the record i ordered one today :-)]]>Mar 31st 2006 12:04AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/
This is a practical idea, but we can do the same thing with a decent filterset on a mailserver...


-Chris]]>Mar 31st 2006 1:11AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/Mar 31st 2006 2:15AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/Mar 31st 2006 5:05AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/Mar 31st 2006 5:12AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/This sort of solution misses the point somewhat. If you are sharing your spam corpus with the rest of the world, then it isn't as effective as having your own individual corpus.

To give an extreme example, if you were a sexual health researcher, you might get emails from colleagues about viagra. With an individual corpus, "viagra" would not actually be related that highly as spam (although v!agrra would be, since your colleagues would not spell it like that). However, for the majority it *is* a spammy word. So using the spam box solution, all the emails from your colleagues would be marked as spam!

It's similar to the way that if my girlfriend got email containing the word "software", it would be more likely to be spam than if I did. Or if I got an email containing "win prizes", it would be more likely to be spam than if she got it.

If we shared our corpuses then both our spam filtering systems would suffer. This goes some way to explainuing why David Pogue had so many false positives; terms in his genuine emails would probably be 'spammy' to the population at large.

Having said that, there is some value in ten thousand people claiming that a word or set of words is spammy. But the individual's preferences should take precedence; the "opinion of the masses" should be taken into account, not taken as gospel.]]>Mar 31st 2006 5:32AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/er, "related" should read "rated" in my post above.]]>Mar 31st 2006 5:37AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/
I highly doubt its that simple where people "vote" on keywords, highly doubtful thats their ENTIRE method of filtering spam.

It doesnt even mention that keyword filtering on their web site

http://www.spamcube.com/howdoesitwork/spam/#ai
]]>Mar 31st 2006 7:45AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/toobsdfortv, fair enough. But I think my point still stands; the article talks about how the service will improve over time as more and more people take it up. That implies that there is some kind of system in place that takes the 'votes' from users and uses those to improve the spam recognition.

So they're still in the situation where you as end user are relying on *other people's* definition of spam.
]]>Mar 31st 2006 8:47AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/Sep 21st 2008 3:51PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/Apr 1st 2006 8:13PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/ go in check out company info and about the founders. its all crap the hyper link to their so called venture capitalist group draws a blank. plus the founder of the company is also founder of the venture group. Plus being a member of the Sillicon Alley.. people this one stinks of a HOAX all the way. i dont believe it .. people are having serious discussion over this one. HAPPY APRIL FOOLS DAY]]>Apr 2nd 2006 5:34AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/
How can it be a hoax if they had one to test out? stop smoking the ganja it's making you paranoid ;)]]>Apr 4th 2006 2:01PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/30/spam-cube-hardware-filter-reviewed/
I’m also training the family to use Netvibes and Del.icio.us rather than depending on duplicating browser set up across computers.
]]>Apr 12th 2006 8:02PM