>Guess PG was wrong! I mean, he wasn't wrong. He was describing the state of spam at the time. The way I see it, you were trying to corner him into giving the

>Guess PG was wrong! I mean, he wasn't wrong. He was describing the state of spam at the time. The way I see it, you were trying to corner him into giving the answer you wanted, and he was trying to corner you into asking the question that would force him to give the answer you wanted. All machine learning models make intrinsic assumptions about their input distribution (no free lunch theorem and all that). If all your objection was that the model will fail to work if the assumptions it makes about the input distribution will fail to hold, that is a criticism for the entire field of machine learning, not this one spam-filtering product.