> Not directly related to Pearl's work, but he basically deserves credit for the wider renaissance in Bayesian techniques. Post hoc ergo propter hoc? The succe

> Not directly related to Pearl's work, but he basically deserves credit for the wider renaissance in Bayesian techniques. Post hoc ergo propter hoc? The success of naive Bayes classifiers for spam filtering must have improved popular perceptions of Bayesian techniques, but let us not go overboard.