The referenced source for the name (Polling with batch service)[0] never uses the term "Israeli Queues", although the doi abstract[1] mentions the phrase and it implies it's unsuitable (no fond usage there).

Seems tasteless. Maybe the author doesn't understand, maybe ChatGPT wrote the article & incorrect reference, maybe this is an attempt at SEO.

[0]: https://pure.tue.nl/ws/files/2152975/632939.pdf [1]: https://doi.org/10.1080/15326340802427497

Maybe I'm looking at a different paper than you? Among other places, on page 16 I see:

> A comparison between the Israeli queue and a regular queue

> It turns out that the Israeli queue is very efficient. To demonstrate this we calculate...

I downloaded it from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228675335_Polling_w...

You are. The one referenced in, and linked from the article, that I linked to: was generated in Dec/2007 and published Jan/2008. The one you've found is apparently the by same authors, but has a publish date 7 months later (Jul/2008), 6 months after it was accepted for publication (so unpublished), and apparently uploaded to ResearchGate by someone with the same name as one of the authors in 2014.

The citation generator makes it clear the Jan/2008 version of https://doi.org/10.1080/15326340802427497 is to be cited.

Your linked Jul/2008 paper has no version or prior publication data, which makes it a bit gnarly to untangle. It does, however, mention reference [5] for "a sketch" (that doesn't exist), and links to itself as the source in the references section. There's something entirely suspicious about this version.

One of my biggest and earliest cross-cultural learnings was going to a bank in Israel to get some cash out in about 2002. I stood in line dutifully and I waited and waited and I got literally nowhere while people walked in after me and just started conversations with the tellers and people in line and got served

Hmm, a software manifestation of social and political stereotypes.

Kind of leaves a strange aftertaste for an otherwise useful concept.

In hindsight it's mildly surprising Sacha Baron Cohen (aka Borat) didn't author this one.

I'm sure the term was coined by an Israeli.

Yeah, it's pretty usual Jewish humor, which is mostly self deprecating.

Only thing is I'm surprised they call it an "Israeli" queue with no reference to elbows.

Just moving past all of that, isn't this just a priority queue, where friends share the same priority as you?

Nice insight.

I'd call it an affinity queue, or perhaps an associative priority queue.

I think that's correct in principle, but the important difference is that you don't have to know the priority in advance.

E.g., to implement an Israeli queue using a standard priority queue, you'd have to track the priority of each "friend group" in a separate data structure.

Concrete priority values are also difficult to reuse without accidentally inserting a new group in the middle of the queue - so the values are at the risk of overflowing.

is it true to assume that in some cases, some messages in the queue might never get processed, if any other messages in the queue have an infinite amount of friends?

Reminds of a triage in a hospital.

we should rename these to "main" queues

that would surely prove to everyone that I have an understanding on behalf of the effected group I imagined, whom I never asked

Took me a second to get your comment, good one.

Ah 2020...when we could just waste our time breaking CI with renaming perfectly good branches.

'chat 'n' cut'