10 interesting stories served every morning and every evening.




1 1,343 shares, 64 trendiness

How I built Timeframe, our family e-paper dashboard

TL;DR: Over the past decade, I’ve worked to build the per­fect fam­ily dash­board sys­tem for our home, called Timeframe. Combining cal­en­dar, weather, and smart home data, it’s be­come an im­por­tant part of our daily lives.

When Caitlin and I got mar­ried a decade ago, we set an in­ten­tion to have a healthy re­la­tion­ship with tech­nol­ogy in our home. We kept our bed­room free of any screens, charg­ing our de­vices else­where overnight. But we missed our cal­en­dar and weather apps.

So I set out to build a so­lu­tion to our prob­lem. First, I con­structed a Magic Mirror us­ing an off-the-shelf med­i­cine cab­i­net and LCD dis­play with its frame re­moved. It showed the cal­en­dar and weather data we needed:

But it was hard to read the text, es­pe­cially dur­ing the day as we get sig­nif­i­cant nat­ural light in Colorado. At night, it glowed like any back­lit dis­play, stick­ing out sorely in our liv­ing space.

I then spent about a year ex­per­i­ment­ing with var­i­ous jail­bro­ken Kindle de­vices, even­tu­ally land­ing on de­sign with cal­en­dar and weather data on a pair of screens. The Kindles took a few sec­onds to re­fresh and flash the screen to re­set the ink pix­els, so they only up­dated every half hour. I de­signed wood en­clo­sures and laser-cut them at the lo­cal li­brary mak­er­space:

Software-wise, I built a Ruby on Rails app for fetch­ing the nec­es­sary data from Google Calendar and Dark Sky. The Kindles woke up on a sched­ule, load­ing a URL in the app that ren­dered a PNG us­ing IMGKit. The pro­to­type proved e-pa­per was the right so­lu­tion: it was un­ob­tru­sive re­gard­less of light­ing:

The Kindles were a hack, re­quir­ing con­stant tin­ker­ing to keep them work­ing. It was time for a more re­li­able so­lu­tion. I tried an OLED screen to see if the lack of a global back­light would be less dis­tract­ing, but it was­n’t much bet­ter than the Magic Mirror:

So it was back to e-pa­per. I found a sys­tem of dis­plays from Visionect, which came in 6”/10”/13”/32” sizes and could up­date every ten min­utes for 2-3 months on a sin­gle charge:

The 32” screen used an out­dated lower-con­trast panel and its res­o­lu­tion was too low to ren­der text smoothly. The smaller sizes used a con­trasty, high-PPI panel. I ended up us­ing a com­bi­na­tion of them around the house: a 6” in the mud­room for the weather, a 13” (with its built-in mag­netic back­ing) in the kitchen at­tached to the side of the fridge, and a 10” in the bed­room.

The Visionect dis­plays re­quired run­ning cus­tom closed-source soft­ware, ei­ther as a SaaS or lo­cally with Docker. I opted for a lo­cal in­stal­la­tion on the Raspberry Pi al­ready run­ning the Rails back­end. I had my best re­sults push­ing im­ages to the Visionect dis­plays every five min­utes in a re­cur­ring back­ground job. It used IMGKit to gen­er­ate a PNG and send it to the Visionect API, logic I ex­tracted into vi­sionect-ruby. This setup proved to be in­cred­i­bly re­li­able, with­out a sin­gle fail­ure for months at a time.

Visiting friends of­ten asked how they could have a sim­i­lar sys­tem in their home. Three years af­ter the ini­tial pro­to­type, I did my first mar­ket test with a po­ten­tial cus­tomer. At their re­quest, I ex­per­i­mented with dif­fer­ent for­mats, in­clud­ing a month view on the 13” screen:

Unfortunately, the cus­tomer did­n’t see enough value to jus­tify the $1000 price tag (in 2019!) for the 13” de­vice, let alone any­thing I’d charge for a sub­scrip­tion ser­vice. At around the same time, Visionect started charg­ing a $7/mo per-de­vice fee to run their back­end soft­ware on premises with Docker, af­ter years of it be­ing free to use. I’d have needed to charge $10/month, if not more, for a sin­gle screen!

In late 2021, the Marshall Fire de­stroyed our home along with ~1,000 oth­ers. Our home­own­er’s in­sur­ance gave us two years to re­build, so we set off to re­design our home from the ground up.

Around the same time, Boox re­leased the 25.3” Mira Pro, the first high-res­o­lu­tion op­tion for large e-pa­per screens. Best of all, it could up­date in re­al­time! Unlike the Visionect de­vices, it was just a dis­play with an HDMI port and needed to be plugged into power. A quick pro­to­type pow­ered by an old Mac Mini made it im­me­di­ately ob­vi­ous that it was a huge step for­ward in ca­pa­bil­ity. The larger screen al­lowed for sig­nif­i­cantly more in­for­ma­tion to be dis­played:

But the most com­pelling in­no­va­tion was hav­ing the screen up­date in re­al­time. I added a clock, the cur­rent song play­ing on our Sonos sys­tem (using jishi/​node-sonos-http-api) and the next-hour pre­cip­i­ta­tion fore­cast from Dark Sky:

The work­ing pro­to­type was enough to con­vince me to build a place for it in the new house. We de­signed a phone nook” on our main floor with an art light for the dis­play:

We also ran power to two more lo­ca­tions for 13” Visionect dis­plays, one in our bed­room and one by the door to our garage:

The real-time re­quire­ments of the Mira Pro im­me­di­ately sur­faced per­for­mance and com­plex­ity is­sues in the back­end, prompt­ing an al­most com­plete rewrite.

While the Visionect sys­tem worked just fine with mul­ti­ple-sec­ond re­sponse times, switch­ing to long-polling every two sec­onds put a ceil­ing on how slow re­sponse times could be. To start, I moved away from gen­er­at­ing im­ages. The Visionect folks added the abil­ity to ren­der a URL di­rectly in the back­end, free­ing up re­sources to serve the long-polling re­quests.

Most sig­nif­i­cantly, I started mi­grat­ing to­wards Home Assistant (HA) as the pri­mary data source. HA al­ready had in­te­gra­tions for Google Calendar, Dark Sky (now Apple Weather), and Sonos, en­abling me to re­move over half of the code in the Timeframe code­base! I ended up land­ing a PR to Home Assistant to al­low for the cal­en­dar be­hav­ior I needed, and will prob­a­bly need to write a cou­ple more be­fore HA can be the sole data source.

With less data-fetch­ing logic, I was able to re­move both the data­base and Redis from the Rails ap­pli­ca­tion, a mas­sive re­duc­tion in com­plex­ity. I now run the back­ground tasks with Rufus Scheduler and save data fetch­ing re­sults with the Rails file store cache back­end.

In ad­di­tion to data re­trieval, I’ve also worked to move as much of the ap­pli­ca­tion logic into Home Assistant. I now au­to­mat­i­cally dis­play the sta­tus of any sen­sor that be­gins with sen­sor.time­frame, us­ing a sim­ple ICON,Label CSV for­mat.

For ex­am­ple, the other day I wanted to have a re­minder to start or sched­ule our dish­washer af­ter 8pm if it was­n’t set to run. It took me about a minute to write a tem­plate sen­sor us­ing the power level from the out­let:

{% if states(‘sen­sor.kitchen_dish­wash­er_switched_out­let_pow­er’)|float < 2 and now().hour > 19 %}

uten­sils,Run the dish­washer!

{% en­dif %}

In the month since adding the helper, it re­minded me twice when I’d have oth­er­wise for­got­ten. And I did­n’t have to com­mit or de­ploy any code!

Since mov­ing into our new home, we’ve come to rely on the real-time func­tion­al­ity much more sig­nif­i­cantly. Effectively, we’ve turned the top-left cor­ner of the dis­plays into a sta­tus in­di­ca­tor for the house. For ex­am­ple, it shows what doors are open/​un­locked:

Or whether the laun­dry is done:

It has a pow­er­ful func­tion: if the sta­tus on the dis­play is blank, the house is in a healthy” state and does not need any at­ten­tion. This ap­proach of only show­ing what in­for­ma­tion is rel­e­vant in a given mo­ment flies right in the face of how most smart homes ap­proach com­mu­ni­cat­ing their sta­tus:

The sin­gle sta­tus in­di­ca­tor re­moves the need to scan an en­tire screen. This change in ap­proach is pos­si­ble be­cause of one key dif­fer­ence: we have sep­a­rated the con­trol of our de­vices from the dis­play of their sta­tus.

I con­tinue to re­ceive sig­nif­i­cant in­ter­est in the pro­ject and re­main fo­cused on bring­ing it to mar­ket. A few key is­sues re­main:

While I have made sig­nif­i­cant progress in han­dling run­time er­rors grace­fully, I have plenty to learn about cre­at­ing em­bed­ded sys­tems that do not need main­te­nance.

There are still sev­eral data sources I fetch di­rectly out­side of Home Assistant. Once HA is the sole source of data, I’ll be able to have Timeframe be a Home Assistant App, mak­ing it sig­nif­i­cantly eas­ier to dis­trib­ute.

The cur­rent hard­ware setup is not ready for adop­tion by the av­er­age con­sumer. The 25” Boox dis­play is ex­cel­lent but costs about $2000! It also does­n’t in­clude the hard­ware needed to drive the dis­play. There are a cou­ple of po­ten­tial op­tions to con­sider, such as Android-powered de­vices from Boox and Philips or low-cost op­tions from TRMNL.

Building Timeframe con­tin­ues to be a pas­sion of mine. While my day job has me build­ing soft­ware for over a hun­dred mil­lion peo­ple, it’s re­fresh­ing to work on a pro­ject that im­proves my fam­i­ly’s daily life.

...

Read the original on hawksley.org »

2 728 shares, 44 trendiness

Account Restricted Without WARNING– Google AI Ultra / OAuth via OpenClaw

I’m seek­ing as­sis­tance re­gard­ing a sud­den re­stric­tion on my Google AI Ultra ac­count that has per­sisted for three days. I re­ceived no prior warn­ings or no­ti­fi­ca­tions re­gard­ing a po­ten­tial vi­o­la­tion.

The only re­cent change in my work­flow was con­nect­ing Gemini mod­els via OpenClaw OAuth. If third-party in­te­gra­tions are the is­sue, I would ex­pect the plat­form to block the in­te­gra­tion rather than re­strict a paid ac­count ($249/mo) with­out com­mu­ni­ca­tion.

I have al­ready emailed sup­port but haven’t re­ceived a re­sponse. Additionally, I found that ac­cess­ing GCC sup­port re­quires an ad­di­tional fee, which seems un­rea­son­able given the ex­ist­ing sub­scrip­tion cost. I WOULD LOVE TO GET THIS RESOLVED!!

Thank you for bring­ing this to our at­ten­tion. We have shared the is­sue to our in­ter­nal teams for a thor­ough in­ves­ti­ga­tion.

To en­sure our en­gi­neer­ing team can in­ves­ti­gate and re­solve these is­sues ef­fec­tively, we highly rec­om­mend fil­ing bug re­ports di­rectly through the Antigravity in-app feed­back tool. You can do this by nav­i­gat­ing to the top-right cor­ner of the in­ter­face, click­ing the Feedback icon, and se­lect­ing Report Issue.

Sir, I am logged out of my ac­count and I can’t even get into the app!! This is so frus­trat­ing..

[UPDATE] Day 4, and still to­tal si­lence from sup­port. I’ve re­ceived zero ac­knowl­edge­ment through of­fi­cial chan­nels or the feed­back cen­ter. I am now in the process of mov­ing all my data and sub­scrip­tions off Google. It’s stag­ger­ing that an or­ga­ni­za­tion of this scale can be this un­re­spon­sive to a wide­spread is­sue.

I con­tacted the Google Cloud Support via GCP Account Suspension Inquiry”. They told me to con­tact Google One Support, be­cause the er­ror is tied to the per­sonal sub­scrip­tion, not to a Google Cloud pro­ject billing ac­count”. Google One sup­port told me to con­tact Google Cloud sup­port

From emails gemini-code-assist-user-feedback” or antigravity-support” still no an­swer.

And it hap­pens af­ter some days af­ter I bought the sub­scrip­tion for an year…

any up­date? please tell us how did u solved it!

Nope, still re­stricted, tried to es­ca­late by Google One, But they can’t help with the prob­lem ei­ther…

Same is­sue and same sen­ti­ment and I can­celled and re­moved billing for all Google prod­ucts. Absolutely shame­ful treat­ment of pay­ing cus­tomers. I emailed each of the con­tact emails for Antigravity and gem­ini-code-as­sist with­out re­ply. Unfortunately I pre­paid for a year so it looks like I’ll have to sue a tril­lion-dol­lar com­pany just to get the measly fee?

I have tried to con­tact every­one I could. And you all know how dis­gust­ing their sup­ports are. I am to­tally dis­ap­pointed with their cus­tomer ser­vice. After 3 weeks wait­ing, the re­sult is that they can­not re­store my ac­count. I guess it is time to move on to Codex or Claude Code. Below is their re­ply af­ter full in­ves­ti­ga­tion by the in­ter­nal team“:

Thank you for your con­tin­ued pa­tience as we have thor­oughly in­ves­ti­gated your ac­count ac­cess is­sue. Please be as­sured that we con­ducted a com­pre­hen­sive in­ves­ti­ga­tion, ex­plor­ing every pos­si­ble av­enue to re­store your ac­cess.

Our prod­uct en­gi­neer­ing team has con­firmed that your ac­count was sus­pended from us­ing our Antigravity ser­vice. This sus­pen­sion af­fects your ac­cess to the Gemini CLI and any other ser­vice that uses the Cloud Code Private API.

Our in­ves­ti­ga­tion specif­i­cally con­firmed that the use of your cre­den­tials within the third-party tool open claw” for test­ing pur­poses con­sti­tutes a vi­o­la­tion of the Google Terms of Service [1]. This is due to the use of Antigravity servers to power a non-Anti­grav­ity prod­uct.

I must be trans­par­ent and in­form you that, in ac­cor­dance with Google’s pol­icy, this sit­u­a­tion falls un­der a zero tol­er­ance pol­icy, and we are un­able to re­verse the sus­pen­sion. I am truly sorry to share this dif­fi­cult news with you.”

Ok so ba­si­caly, there’s no way we can re­store our ac­counts to use Antigravity any­more yeah? this is un­ex­pected, but un­til we can fig­ure out how to re­solve this is­sue, I’ll just sub­scribed us­ing dif­fer­ent ac­count

I’m in the same sit­u­a­tion…

Hi @Abhijit_Pramanik , could you please pro­vide some help? This si­lence is un­bear­able.

Gemini Disabled on Antigravity IDE, How to Restore Access?

I’m in con­tact with Google One but their ac­tions are no help at all, for al­most a week they haven’t done any­thing, they only asked for screen­shots/​record­ings of the lo­gin at­tempt.

Why is there si­lence from Google? What is the user sup­posed to do? Create a new ac­count and buy a new PRO/ULTRA, or what? Any in­for­ma­tion at all?!

I’ve got ban and the only dif­fer­ence from vanilla IDE ex­pe­ri­ence was anti­grav­ity-cock­pit ex­ten­sion. No re­ply to my ap­peal email last 12 hours.

ost. I WOULD LOVE TO GET THIS RESOLVED!!

I’m sub­scrib­ing the AI Pro and just in­te­grated Gemini to OpenCode yes­ter­day. After a just day use, my ac­count is sus­pended with­out any warn­ings. Simply the API re­turns 403 er­ror to my OpenCode and Gemini CLI like this:

Failed to lo­gin. Message: This ser­vice has been dis­abled in this ac­count for vi­o­la­tion of Terms of Service. If you be­lieve this is an er­ror, con­tact gem­ini-code-as­sist-user-feed­back@google.com.

I emailed to the con­tact this morn­ing but did­n’t get any re­sponse yet.

If this is in­deed the case, I find it ut­terly ab­surd. It seems Google’s re­sponse is woe­fully in­ad­e­quate; I should ex­plore Claude or other al­ter­na­tives.

Quick up­date for every­one stuck in this 403 loop: I just spent the last 8 days fight­ing through Tier 1 sup­port. Google One sup­port fi­nally ad­mit­ted on record it’s a known WAF bug’, but then lit­er­ally routed me to Android App Developer sup­port be­cause they have no back­end ac­cess to fix it.

The en­tire sup­port flow­chart is com­pletely bro­ken, and they are still billing us $250/mo for bricked ac­counts. I just doc­u­mented the en­tire Kafkaesque sup­port loop over on the google_anti­grav­ity sub­red­dit. If you are stuck in this same Catch-22, go search for that post over there and share your Trajectory IDs in the com­ments so we can get some ac­tual en­gi­neer­ing eyes on this mass ban wave.

Hi @K8L, just wanted to share some con­text re­gard­ing this sit­u­a­tion as I see you are wait­ing for a re­sponse.

Yesterday, Abhijit ac­tu­ally posted a brief state­ment ac­knowl­edg­ing these 403 ToS is­sues, not­ing that the in­ter­nal team was prioritizing a res­o­lu­tion.’ However, the mes­sage was deleted just a few min­utes later.

Hoping for some trans­parency, I left a sin­gle, po­lite com­ment ask­ing for clar­i­fi­ca­tion on why the up­date was re­moved. Surprisingly, my fo­rum ac­count was banned shortly af­ter post­ing that ques­tion.

Currently, there seems to be no of­fi­cial com­mu­ni­ca­tion re­gard­ing these 403 er­rors, al­though we can see ac­tive replies be­ing made to other un­re­lated threads on the fo­rum.

This sit­u­a­tion is quite con­cern­ing for us as de­vel­op­ers. The au­to­mated sys­tem is still trig­ger­ing these mass bans daily dur­ing fixed time win­dows, with­out any warn­ing and seem­ingly with­out a re­view of the cur­rent process.

Fingers crossed this mes­sage does­n’t get taken down and my ac­count sur­vives long enough for you guys to read it, haha.

Facing this is­sue too, I wrote an email to gem­ini-code-as­sist-user-feed­back@google.com eight days ago”, and still got no re­sponse to­day. So dis­ap­pointed

My ac­count (pro) was also bricked for call­ing Gemini model from pi har­ness two times. No re­sponse from sup­port and it’s been four days.

...

Read the original on discuss.ai.google.dev »

3 514 shares, 26 trendiness

Short videos. Your community. Your rules.

All the fun of short-form video, none of the cor­po­rate con­trol.

Loops is fed­er­ated, open-source, and de­signed to give power back to cre­ators and com­mu­ni­ties across the so­cial web. Build your com­mu­nity on a plat­form that can’t lock you in.

...

Read the original on joinloops.org »

4 482 shares, 122 trendiness

Ladybird adopts Rust, with help from AI

We’ve been search­ing for a mem­ory-safe pro­gram­ming lan­guage to re­place C++ in Ladybird for a while now. We pre­vi­ously ex­plored Swift, but the C++ in­terop never quite got there, and plat­form sup­port out­side the Apple ecosys­tem was lim­ited. Rust is a dif­fer­ent story. The ecosys­tem is far more ma­ture for sys­tems pro­gram­ming, and many of our con­trib­u­tors al­ready know the lan­guage. Going for­ward, we are rewrit­ing parts of Ladybird in Rust.

When we orig­i­nally eval­u­ated Rust back in 2024, we re­jected it be­cause it’s not great at C++ style OOP. The web plat­form ob­ject model in­her­its a lot of 1990s OOP fla­vor, with garbage col­lec­tion, deep in­her­i­tance hi­er­ar­chies, and so on. Rust’s own­er­ship model is not a nat­ural fit for that.

But af­ter an­other year of tread­ing wa­ter, it’s time to make the prag­matic choice. Rust has the ecosys­tem and the safety guar­an­tees we need. Both Firefox and Chromium have al­ready be­gun in­tro­duc­ing Rust into their code­bases, and we think it’s the right choice for Ladybird too.

Our first tar­get was LibJS , Ladybird’s JavaScript en­gine. The lexer, parser, AST, and byte­code gen­er­a­tor are rel­a­tively self-con­tained and have ex­ten­sive test cov­er­age through test262, which made them a nat­ural start­ing point.

I used Claude Code and Codex for the trans­la­tion. This was hu­man-di­rected, not au­tonomous code gen­er­a­tion. I de­cided what to port, in what or­der, and what the Rust code should look like. It was hun­dreds of small prompts, steer­ing the agents where things needed to go. After the ini­tial trans­la­tion, I ran mul­ti­ple passes of ad­ver­sar­ial re­view, ask­ing dif­fer­ent mod­els to an­a­lyze the code for mis­takes and bad pat­terns.

The re­quire­ment from the start was byte-for-byte iden­ti­cal out­put from both pipelines. The re­sult was about 25,000 lines of Rust, and the en­tire port took about two weeks. The same work would have taken me mul­ti­ple months to do by hand. We’ve ver­i­fied that every AST pro­duced by the Rust parser is iden­ti­cal to the C++ one, and all byte­code gen­er­ated by the Rust com­piler is iden­ti­cal to the C++ com­pil­er’s out­put. Zero re­gres­sions across the board:

No per­for­mance re­gres­sions on any of the JS bench­marks we track ei­ther.

Beyond the test suites, I’ve done ex­ten­sive test­ing by brows­ing the web in a lock­step mode where both the C++ and Rust pipelines run si­mul­ta­ne­ously, ver­i­fy­ing that out­put is iden­ti­cal for every piece of JavaScript that flows through them.

If you look at the code, you’ll no­tice it has a strong translated from C++” vibe. That’s be­cause it is trans­lated from C++. The top pri­or­ity for this first pass is com­pat­i­bil­ity with our C++ pipeline. The Rust code in­ten­tion­ally mim­ics things like the C++ reg­is­ter al­lo­ca­tion pat­terns so that the two com­pil­ers pro­duce iden­ti­cal byte­code. Correctness is a close sec­ond. We know the re­sult is­n’t id­iomatic Rust, and there’s a lot that can be sim­pli­fied once we’re com­fort­able re­tir­ing the C++ pipeline. That cleanup will come in time.

This is not be­com­ing the main fo­cus of the pro­ject. We will con­tinue de­vel­op­ing the en­gine in C++, and port­ing sub­sys­tems to Rust will be a side­track that runs for a long time. New Rust code will co­ex­ist with ex­ist­ing C++ through well-de­fined in­terop bound­aries.

We want to be de­lib­er­ate about which parts get ported and in what or­der, so the port­ing ef­fort is man­aged by the core team. Please co­or­di­nate with us be­fore start­ing any port­ing work so no­body wastes their time on some­thing we can’t merge.

I know this will be a con­tro­ver­sial move, but I be­lieve it’s the right de­ci­sion for Ladybird’s fu­ture. :^)

...

Read the original on ladybird.org »

5 300 shares, 50 trendiness

Elsevier Shuts Down Its Finance Journal Citation Cartel

On Christmas Eve, 9 peer-reviewed” eco­nom­ics pa­pers were qui­etly re­tracted by Elsevier, the world’s largest aca­d­e­mic pub­lisher.

This in­cludes 7 pa­pers in the International Review of Financial Analysis (a good jour­nal—it has an 18% ac­cep­tance rate):

Plus two more re­trac­tions in Finance Research Letters (29% ac­cep­tance rate):

Two days later, three more pa­pers were re­tracted at the International Review of Economics & Finance (30% ac­cep­tance rate):

All 12 pa­pers had one thing in com­mon: Brian M Lucey, Professor of International Finance and Commodities, Trinity College Dublin — the #1 ranked eco­nom­ics and busi­ness school in Ireland — as a co-au­thor.

Lucey pub­lished 56 pa­pers in 2025, one pa­per every 6.5 days. Lmao.

Lucey has pub­lished 44 pa­pers in Finance Research Letters alone, an Elsevier jour­nal he edited.

I emailed Lucey for com­ment, but he did not re­spond.

Brian Lucey… where have I heard that name be­fore?

Oh yeah, he bul­lied me on Twitter in 2023.

The stated rea­son for the re­trac­tions was that: review of this sub­mis­sion was over­seen, and the fi­nal de­ci­sion was made, by the Editor Brian Lucey, de­spite his role as a co-au­thor of the man­u­script. This com­pro­mised the ed­i­to­r­ial process and breached the jour­nal’s poli­cies.”

In plain terms, Lucey was serv­ing as ed­i­tor while ap­prov­ing his own pa­pers. The re­sult was a com­plete by­pass of peer re­view—an abuse of ed­i­to­r­ial au­thor­ity that func­tioned as a ci­ta­tion-car­tel scheme.

Apparently this was an open se­cret in the pro­fes­sion for many years, with EJMR com­ments go­ing back 5+ years ex­plic­itly call­ing him out as a cheater:

Along with the 12 re­trac­tions, Lucey was re­moved as an ed­i­tor at 5 jour­nals: International Review of Financial Analysis, the International Review of Economics & Finance, Finance Research Letters, Financial Management, & Energy Finance.

Lucey re­mains as ed­i­tor-in-chief at Wiley’s Journal of Economic Surveys.

I emailed Wiley, and they pro­vided me with this state­ment:

We are aware of these con­cerns and have in­ves­ti­gated Prof. Lucey’s ac­tiv­ity on Journal of Economic Surveys. Our re­search in­tegrity team did not find any con­cerns re­gard­ing con­flict of in­ter­est or mis­han­dling of pa­pers, nor has Prof. Lucey pub­lished any pa­pers in the jour­nal since he joined the ed­i­to­r­ial team as a co-ed­i­tor in 2024. We ex­pect full com­mit­ment and ad­her­ence to our ed­i­to­r­ial prac­tices and stan­dards, and we will be mon­i­tor­ing the sit­u­a­tion to en­sure that there is no im­proper han­dling of pa­pers at the jour­nal.

In re­sponse to Wiley’s state­ment, one EMJR user wrote: I am baf­fled how they could pos­si­bly still have con­fi­dence in him, given his se­ri­ous and sys­tem­atic eth­i­cal lapses in ed­i­to­r­ial po­si­tions. Sounds some­what naive to ex­pect full ad­her­ence to our ed­i­to­r­ial prac­tices and stan­dards’!”

Until be­ing purged from the lead­er­ship of these 5 jour­nals, Lucey played a cen­tral role in co­or­di­nat­ing Elsevier’s Finance Journals Ecosystem, which al­lows participating jour­nals to sug­gest trans­fer­ring a re­jected man­u­script to an­other jour­nal in the sys­tem with­out the need for re­sub­mis­sion and the as­so­ci­ated cost.”

That sys­tem, and the ed­i­tors in­volved, came un­der fire last year when a preprint sug­gested it might fa­cil­i­tate ci­ta­tion stack­ing as a way to boost jour­nal im­pact fac­tors. The analy­sis in the preprint also sug­gested a ci­ta­tion ring in­volv­ing Elsevier ed­i­tors could be at work.”

I emailed the anony­mous Theophilos Nomos” who wrote this pa­per, but they did not re­spond to my email.

That pre-print names Samuel Vigne, a fi­nance pro­fes­sor at Luiss Business School, for­mer PhD stu­dent of Lucey, and pro­lific Lucey co-au­thor (they have pub­lished at least 33 pa­pers to­gether) as a core node of Lucey’s ci­ta­tion car­tel.

Multiple pub­li­ca­tions by Vigne and Lucey are flagged on PubPeer.

This ex­am­ple neatly il­lus­trates how their co-au­thor­ship trad­ing scheme op­er­ated:

It de­scribes a draft up­loaded to SSRN with three au­thors:

After sub­mit­ting that draft to the Elsevier fi­nance ecosys­tem, that draft was scrubbed from SSRN, and in the fi­nal pub­lished ver­sion, an ad­di­tional au­thor (Samuel Vigne) was added as a new au­thor, with an equal con­tri­bu­tion” state­ment. The two ver­sions are oth­er­wise iden­ti­cal, con­tain­ing the same fig­ures, sec­tions, and text.

Co-authorship trad­ing is only one part of the op­er­a­tion. The other is ci­ta­tion stack­ing. In this model, a small, tightly linked group fun­nels an enor­mous vol­ume of pa­pers into the same hand­ful of jour­nals, then sys­tem­at­i­cally stuffs those pa­pers with ci­ta­tions to one an­other. The re­sult is a rapid, ar­ti­fi­cial ex­plo­sion in ci­ta­tion counts that makes them look like in­flu­en­tial ge­niuses.

Take John Gooddell, a pro­fes­sor at the University of Akron and a Lucey co-au­thor. Gooddell has pub­lished 68 pa­pers in Finance Research Letters alone, a jour­nal edited by Lucey. If each pa­per con­tains even a mod­est 50 ref­er­ences, that amounts to roughly 3,400 ci­ta­tions re­cy­cled through a sin­gle out­let. In 2024 alone, Gooddell pub­lished 61 pa­pers. He’s not do­ing re­search. He’s farm­ing ci­ta­tions.

Following Lucey’s re­trac­tions, Samuel Vigne was re­moved as the ed­i­tor-in-chief of International Review of Financial Analysis and Finance Research Letters.

In ad­di­tion to that anony­mous pre-print, there is also a 2025 pa­per writ­ten by ac­tual pro­fes­sors with so­phis­ti­cated econo­met­ric analy­sis & graph the­ory which de­scribes the ci­ta­tion car­tel in much more de­tail. The con­clu­sion of that pa­per is: Elsevier ecosys­tem jour­nals ben­e­fited from the cre­ation of the ecosys­tem … Elsevier jour­nals in the ecosys­tem have over­lap­ping ed­i­tors and Elsevier ap­points these ed­i­tors in co­or­di­na­tion with a sin­gle aca­d­e­mic [Brian Lucey] that man­ages the fleet of ecosys­tem jour­nals.”

Brian Lucey posted a re­ply to this pa­per, which was ex­tremely weak and does not con­tain any ta­bles or fig­ures. It mostly ig­nores the data and struc­tural model of the ci­ta­tion ring and in­stead leans on Lucey’s lived ex­pe­ri­ence” as an ed­i­tor (“we have ex­pe­ri­ence shep­herd­ing…”), while also nit­pick­ing se­man­tics and phras­ing, such as Lucey com­plain­ing that they called him a professor of fi­nance” in­stead of his full hon­orific, professor of in­ter­na­tional fi­nance and com­modi­ties.”

The Elsevier ecosys­tem web page went live on 4 November 2020 , ac­cord­ing to Lucey’s re­but­tal. Below is a vi­su­al­iza­tion of the net­work be­fore and af­ter this tran­si­tion date, which shows a clear dis­tor­tion of the ci­ta­tion net­work. During 2021-2025, the Ecosystem ci­ta­tions per ar­ti­cle is 103 % higher.

2020 is also the year where Brian Lucey’s ci­ta­tion pro­file ex­hibits an ex­po­nen­tial J-curve”, a Hallmark of ci­ta­tion rings. Did he sud­denly be­come a well-re­spected ge­nius in 2020? Or did he fig­ure out how to cheat the sys­tem?

In a com­ment to Retraction Watch, Lucey fur­ther ar­gued that ci­ta­tion car­tels are not a crime, be­cause every­one does it.

Because here’s the thing: Elsevier are aware of [editors pub­lish­ing in their own jour­nals] as a pretty com­mon prac­tice in fi­nance and eco­nom­ics. We’ve given them ev­i­dence of hun­dreds of in­stances of this. And noth­ing has hap­pened, which does raise the ques­tion, you know, maybe they’re go­ing to go back and go look at all these. Presumably, they will treat every­thing the same.” Lucey shared his list of such in­stances. It in­cludes 240 ar­ti­cles, 133 of which are in Science of the Total Environment, which was delisted from Clarivate’s Web of Science in November.

Dr. Thorsten Beck, in a blog post, con­firmed that no, not every­one does it, and yes, it is a crime.

This in­ci­dent raises an im­por­tant ques­tion: is this com­mon prac­tice across aca­d­e­mic jour­nals? And are there rules for ed­i­tors pub­lish­ing in their’ jour­nals? As I was ed­i­tor across three jour­nals for a to­tal of 11 years, I can cer­tainly speak to this (and clearly say NO).I don’t have for­mal con­fir­ma­tion but I have been told by sev­eral in­de­pen­dent sources that ul­ti­mately even Elsevier re­alised that this ed­i­tor was se­ri­ously dam­ag­ing the rep­u­ta­tion of the jour­nal, ap­point­ing a sec­ond ed­i­tor and then eas­ing out the doubtful’ ed­i­tor from his re­spon­si­bil­i­ties.

The fall­out from the Lucey–Vigne era ex­tends far be­yond a hand­ful of re­tracted PDFs. What it ex­poses is a struc­tural weak­ness in how aca­d­e­mic excellence” is man­u­fac­tured, mea­sured, and mon­e­tized. By pre­sid­ing over a co­or­di­nated clus­ter of jour­nals, a small group of ed­i­tors ef­fec­tively gained the abil­ity to print their own aca­d­e­mic cur­rency.

However, blam­ing Lucey and Vigne alone ig­nores the hand that fed them. Elsevier did not just allow” this to hap­pen; they en­gi­neered the en­vi­ron­ment for it to flour­ish, be­cause of in­cen­tives: Elsevier’s in­ter­nal met­rics (Impact Factors) di­rectly ben­e­fit­ted from this be­hav­ior. It was a sym­bi­otic cor­rup­tion: the ed­i­tors re­ceived a fast-track to aca­d­e­mic star­dom, and Elsevier re­ceived a high-mar­gin, high-vol­ume pro­duc­tion line of citable con­tent.

This is the paper mill” reimag­ined for the elite: not a base­ment op­er­a­tion in a third-world na­tion, but a pol­ished, cor­po­rate-man­dated fac­tory within the halls o the world’s most pow­er­ful pub­lisher. This is the nat­ural re­sult of a cor­po­rate man­date to max­i­mize prof­its by bundling jour­nals into mo­nop­oly-priced pack­ages, forc­ing uni­ver­si­ties to pay for the very prestige” that Elsevier’s own staff helped to di­lute. As one EJMR com­menter noted, The tragedy is­n’t that they cheated; it’s that the sys­tem was de­signed to let them thrive for a decade be­fore any­one both­ered to look at the data.”

The ques­tion now is whether Trinity College Dublin will fire Lucey.

They did not re­spond to my in­quiry.

An ed­i­tor of a psy­chol­ogy jour­nal was of­fered $1,500 per ac­cepted pa­per.

Richard Tol, a pro­fes­sor of eco­nom­ics at the University of Sussex, wrote that he was of­fered $5,000 per pa­per.

Muhammad Ali Nasir, a pro­fes­sor of Macroeconomics at Leeds University, wrote about how com­mon sell­ing pa­pers is in European fi­nance jour­nals: I had been made such of­fers from anony­mous emails but I choose not to en­gage and in one case for­warded the email to EiC. I will be sur­prised if any ed­i­tor is not ap­proached by these peo­ple.”

This raises a multi-mil­lion-euro ques­tion: given their doc­u­mented cor­rup­tion, are the var­i­ous educational con­sul­tan­cies” and spe­cial-pur­pose ve­hi­cles op­er­ated by Brian Lucey and Samuel Vigne used to cir­cu­late ecosys­tem funds, con­fer­ence fees, or consultancy” pay­outs from au­thors seek­ing a short­cut to pub­li­ca­tion?

Here is a hy­po­thet­i­cal out­line of how such a cash-flow scheme could func­tion.“Hello [unknown, dis­tant in­sti­tu­tions], we of­fer con­sult­ing ser­vices: €€€ for ex­cel­lent ad­vice on how to pub­lish in top-tier fi­nance jour­nals. Our ad­vice yields re­sults.”

I’m not go­ing to pro­vide de­tails on how to cor­ruptly have a pa­per pub­lished. I’m just go­ing to spec­u­late on what could be go­ing on in a sit­u­a­tion like this. It could be based on consultancy fees” for ad­vice on pub­lish­ing that you or your in­sti­tu­tion pay to one of those com­pa­nies. They give some ad­vice, in­clud­ing what pa­pers to cite, etc, and if you fol­low their ad­vice you are likely to be pub­lished in one of their jour­nals. This could be at­trac­tive for re­searchers and in­sti­tu­tions in, e.g., China and the Middle East.

Another anony­mous eco­nom­ics pro­fes­sor I spoke to told me:

Universities in East and West Asia pay cash bonuses for pub­li­ca­tions. Some au­thors hire a bro­ker (many ad­ver­tise openly on Facebook), other au­thors con­tact the ed­i­tor di­rectly. The cash bonus is shared be­tween the au­thor, bro­ker, and ed­i­tor. Besides sell­ing pa­pers, they also sell spe­cial is­sues, which al­low the guest ed­i­tors to do what they want.And they sell po­si­tions on the ed­i­to­r­ial board, which are im­por­tant for pro­mo­tion to the next aca­d­e­mic rank.Some pay­ments are in cash, oth­ers in kind. Finally, they or­ga­nize con­fer­ences. Registration fees more than cover the costs of putting on a con­fer­ence. The con­fer­ence name sug­gests it is or­ga­nized by a so­ci­ety, but it re­ally is Lucey who pock­ets the prof­its.

Brian Lucey and Samuel Vigne op­er­ate four pri­vate com­pa­nies in Ireland and the UK clas­si­fied un­der other ed­u­ca­tion,” likely func­tion­ing as con­sul­tan­cies or spe­cial-pur­pose ve­hi­cles for aca­d­e­mic or pol­icy work.

The ex­is­tence of these con­sul­tan­cies war­rants in­ves­ti­ga­tion into po­ten­tial con­flicts of in­ter­est and fi­nan­cial mis­con­duct.

...

Read the original on www.chrisbrunet.com »

6 295 shares, 20 trendiness

My journey to the microwave alternate timeline — LessWrong

This web­site re­quires javascript to prop­erly func­tion. Consider ac­ti­vat­ing javascript to get ac­cess to all site func­tion­al­ity.

...

Read the original on www.lesswrong.com »

7 276 shares, 14 trendiness

Six Math Essentials

Just a brief an­nounce­ment that I have been work­ing with Quanta Books to pub­lish a short book in pop­u­lar math­e­mat­ics en­ti­tled Six Math Essentials“, which will cover six of the fun­da­men­tal con­cepts in math­e­mat­ics — num­bers, al­ge­bra, geom­e­try, prob­a­bil­ity, analy­sis, and dy­nam­ics — and how they con­nect with our real-world in­tu­ition, the his­tory of math and sci­ence, and to mod­ern prac­tice of math­e­mat­ics, both in the­ory and in ap­pli­ca­tions. The sched­uled pub­li­ca­tion date is Oct 27, but it is cur­rently avail­able for pre­order.

...

Read the original on terrytao.wordpress.com »

8 259 shares, 9 trendiness

Fix your tools

Last week I had to di­ag­nose a bug in an open source li­brary I main­tain. The is­sue was gnarly enough that I could­n’t find it right away, but then I thought: if I set a break­point here and fire up the de­bug­ger, I will likely find the root cause very soon… and then pro­ceed to mer­ci­lessly de­stroy it!

So I rolled up my sleeves, set the break­point, fired up the de­bug­ger, and… saw the pro­gram run to com­ple­tion with­out in­ter­rup­tions what­so­ever. My break­point had been ig­nored, even though I knew for cer­tain that the line of code in ques­tion must have been ex­e­cuted (I dou­ble-checked just to be sure).

Since I was in problem solv­ing mode”, I ig­nored the de­bug­ger is­sue and started think­ing of other ap­proaches to di­ag­nos­ing it. Prey to my tun­nel vi­sion, I mod­i­fied the code to log po­ten­tially in­ter­est­ing data, but it did­n’t yield the in­sights I was hop­ing for. How frus­trat­ing!

My fin­ger­tips itched to write even more trou­bleshoot­ing code when it sud­denly dawned on me: just fix the darn de­bug­ger al­ready! Sure, it might feel slower, but it will give you the abil­ity to see what you need to see, and then ac­tu­ally solve the prob­lem.

So I fixed the de­bug­ger (it turned out to be a one-line con­fig­u­ra­tion change), ob­served the pro­gram’s be­hav­ior in more de­tail, and used that knowl­edge to solve the is­sue.

What a para­dox, I re­al­ized af­ter­wards. The very de­sire to fix the bug pre­vented me from see­ing I had to fix the tool first, and made me less ef­fec­tive in my bug hunt. This blog post is a re­minder to my­self, and to every bug-hun­gry pro­gram­mer out there: fix your tools! They will do won­ders for you.

...

Read the original on ochagavia.nl »

9 227 shares, 17 trendiness

Welcome

The link you clicked leads to a Base64 en­coded string.

To de­code it, you can use:

Skip to con­tent­Feb­ru­ary Updates 🌸The largest col­lec­tion of free stuff on the in­ter­net!Learn how to block ads, track­ers and other nasty things. Explore the world of AI and ma­chine learn­ing.Stream, down­load, tor­rent and binge all your favourite movies and shows!Stream, down­load and tor­rent songs, pod­casts and more!Down­load and play all your favourite games or em­u­late some old but gold ones!Whether you’re a book­worm, otaku or comic book fan, you’ll be able to find your favourite pieces of lit­er­a­ture here!Down­load all your favourite soft­ware, movies, shows, mu­sic, games and more!Down­load your favourite me­dia us­ing the BitTorrent pro­to­col.All forms of con­tent for Android and iOS.Con­tent in lan­guages other than English.Various top­ics like food, travel, news, shop­ping, fun sites and more!

...

Read the original on fmhy.net »

10 220 shares, 17 trendiness

The JavaScript Oxidation Compiler

Catch bugs be­fore they make it to pro­duc­tion

Usage Guide

...

Read the original on oxc.rs »

To add this web app to your iOS home screen tap the share button and select "Add to the Home Screen".

10HN is also available as an iOS App

If you visit 10HN only rarely, check out the the best articles from the past week.

If you like 10HN please leave feedback and share

Visit pancik.com for more.