Bayesian Poisoning
“A, let’s say” reminded me of a folder on my computer titled “SPAM Texts Gibberish” and what I put in it (Q: Does one put something in a computer file? On might also apply.)1
It contains various forms of Bayesian poisoning, a kind of email message slop: spammer techniques that use random strings of gibberish meant to beat spam filters. Also known as hashbusting for its use of nonsense inserted into messages to defeat checksum- or hash-based filters. Every message receives a unique string so that identical bulk mail seems unique. It’s also sometimes called litspam for its attempt to sound legitimately literate and its aim to outsmart (can we call it smart?). Bayesian filters. Perihelion, harelip, maelstrom, pyrotechnics, cortisone, duckweed, gluey, lexical — perfectly fine words that get security clearance, even though they form grammatically corrupt nonsense once through the doorway.
These strings are now less prevalent in my spam folder. Maybe they’ve been superseded by some other poison, you wonder. They have. Bayesian filters are outdated, and modern email filters moved away from simple statistical filtering methods some time ago. They’ve adopted neural networks, ensemble machine learning models, and other techniques that don't rely on word-probability scores. Filters began detecting word salads; spammers abandoned the tactic; behavioral analysis (by whom, what) and other forms of authentication (ibid) supplanted content-based filtering.
But I preserved a few in my collection for your enjoyment. (Collection of What? is a fair question that I refuse to answer). Are these voices? Do they have a voice? What is voice?
Consider:
There were two flying fish inside.
A ticket-checking turnstile gate popular with children helps increase the business children’s playgrounds.
Children’s playground ticket system.jpg
The smart ticketing system is effectively prevent favor tickets and reduce losses.
API can be provided to support secondary development.
Welcome to contact us if any needs.
About collide leisured. It’s a debilitate at home Below plunder.
They are a buzzer burner should reprehensible, by mistake bacon fishmonger.
Dear Respected, I want to ask you, do you have any 2d or 3d Requirements, which you might be looking to create or outsource due to overflow of work.
Because of tabor nomadic towards curling dire, on television firework of regularly. How attend, wherewith nephritis?Around poop, transom in fact amateur clean a
That’s profiteer, czarina about ethnologist day by day assumption tidings. She decoration opposite. She poundage.
Around syrup hinge outside uncover breeches in future intercalary. Which polarity, lifeboat… These generate headless against mogul are schism pains on holiday.
They’re an sauce weary at present mishandle, who awhile these reconnoitre. At present vigilant masonry for dinner flick perk, around mettlesome!
With spectator, cumulus on holiday ethnographer because till tourist. For breakfast eradicate neither. She is the disown. Instead of festoon, is frisian?
Step by step maternal because of perihelion sinner sateen. Mine transmigration pedal. On a trip hearth, of. They are mimicry. The aquaplane in front of pride!
For breakfast refract slipstream. Beside niff, kitchen… Step by step foredoomed, reproduce either plinth will be hall duckweed.
How many cyclopaedia wherewith Next to booth. By the way marocain, witchcraft were cortisone crisp between illegal. Above enhance canned shall courtship cranky.
I’m the baseless, underlay? That demagnetize, incubator are measurable in cornflower for dinner goofy. He orthodoxy preeminently victimize.
She is the copperplate foresaw into proscription, by bus workbench of bast. I the antithetic hartebeest during seedy, granted distrustful reconstitute near harelip. On television turf, who grievance?
It is the maelstrom improbable by mistake winceyette, have mallow about window!
He observance in the evening trigger colorful. This gluey schooling is lexical, by car utilitarianism.
On holiday diligent, pewter. She is a composition, mediocrity by virtue of lodge these specific missy.
In the afternoon peacemaker courtship therm.
Instead of pyrotechnics kiln next to peseta rudiment away daiquiri.
The Q is not what I was Googling, though I understand the impulse to ask it. Somehow, some seeking of “road” led to an initial stuttered reply, “This is a, let’s say, “a not a, let’s say,” before the recursion. What or who might the implied “us” be? This lacks an antecedent. Let’s implies an undefined collective. The opening quotation mark is not closed, but it opens a negative that has a mathematical/statistical construction “a, not a” before settling on an affirmative construction. And then, in the recursion, there are all those opening quotation marks that aren't closed, at least for anyone viewing it on the patch of screen we have available. Is this fullness? Emptiness? Anything? Are we open or closed?