The challenge of having to deal with dependent variables in classification and regression using techniques based on Bayes' theorem is often avoided by assuming a strong independence between them, hence such techniques are said to be naive. While analytical solutions supporting classification on arbitrary amounts of discrete and continuous random variables exist, practical solutions are scarce. We are evaluating a few Bayesian models empirically and consider their computational complexity. To overcome the often assumed independence, those models attempt to resolve the dependencies using empirical joint conditional probabilities and joint conditional probability densities. These are obtained by posterior probabilities of the dependent variable after segmenting the dataset for each random variable's value. We demonstrate the advantages of these models, such as their nature being deterministic (no randomization or weights required), that no training is required, that each random variable may have any kind of probability distribution, how robustness is upheld without having to impute missing data, and that online learning is effortlessly possible. We compare such Bayesian models against well-established classifiers and regression models, using some well-known datasets. We conclude that our evaluated models can outperform other models in certain settings, using classification. The regression models deliver respectable performance, without leading the field.