u/yarpen_z

Jak w tytule; najwyraźniej można mieć 22 retrakcje AI slopów pisanych przy współpracy z naukowcami z Bliskiego i Dalekiego Wschodu, ale 23 to już zbyt wiele jak na standardy nauki polskiej.

> Prezydium Rady Doskonałości Naukowej postanowieniem z 27 kwietnia 2026 roku wznowiło postępowanie profesorskie Marka Jaszczura. Było ono zapoczątkowane prawie trzy lata temu – 22 sierpnia 2023 r. Po pół roku, 26 lutego 2024 roku, wraz z pięcioma pozytywnymi recenzjami, zostało przekazane przez przewodniczącego RDN do Kancelarii Prezydenta RP. Prezydent Andrzej Duda podpisał nominację profesorską Marka Jaszczura w czerwcu 2024 roku.

> Wznowienie postępowania profesorskiego polega na ponownej ocenie przez nowych recenzentów ówcześnie przedstawionego dorobku naukowego. Zostało ono wszczęte na wniosek Zespołu Inżynieryjno-Technicznego RDN, którego 24 członków biorących udział w głosowaniu 9 kwietnia 2026 r. jednogłośnie poparło konieczność wznowienia. Można podejrzewać, że jego członkowie – wybitni profesorowie z uczelni technicznych – nie byli już w stanie zamykać oczu na coraz liczniejsze doniesienia prasowe o współpracy polskich profesorów z grupami irackich, irańskich, pakistańskich lub hinduskich „młynarzy”. Wytwarzali oni przy pomocy AI dziesiątki małowartościowych i przyczynkowych artykułów naukowych, publikowanych w języku angielskim, z reguły w wysoko punktowanych czasopismach typu open access.

https://forumakademickie.pl/rdn-wznawia-postepowanie-profesorskie-badacza-z-23-retrakcjami/

Hi!

In December last year, I wrote a long-ish post about my concerns with the development and future of Logseq: So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish?. There, I was sharing my doubts about the future of the project and my initial plans of moving to Obsidian. I ended up procrastinating on this for quite a while and waiting for the upcoming stable Logseq release, as discussion comments indicated that the DB version is almost feature-complete. Since that time, not much has happened: while the DB version is getting new features (there was no mention of CLI for AI agents back then, as far as I can remember), it is still in beta, and the DB/OG split makes me wonder about the future of keeping Markdown-only storage in Logseq.

Finally, I decided to make the switch to Obsidian three weeks ago. Since I shared my concerns and asked the Logseq community for recommendations, I wanted to share my experience as well. I want to be fully transparent: not every part of my workflow in Logseq can be translated and replaced. This has been my journey between PKM tools: what worked for me might not work for you. Nonetheless, I hope that you will find here something useful that will save you time. And if I move back to Logseq or I become disillusioned with Obsidian in a few months, I promise to come back here and tell you honestly it didn't work in the end.

If your experience was different, you ended up with a different setup, or perhaps you found better solutions than I did - please share in the comments. I'm happy to learn more about them.

Why switch? Why Obsidian?

A few basic assumptions that should explain why I switched and why I have not chosen Tana or any emerging Logseq clones. I think these are important, as if your workflow or requirements are significantly different from mine, then it's likely that my experience will not be very helpful to you.

• I have been with Logseq for 5 years now. I have a medium-sized graph with 1551 journals and 1101 pages, synchronized with over 22,000 git commits in my private repository (as of June 2026).
• My main problem with Logseq was performance issues appearing on both desktop and laptop Linux machines, both quite powerful systems; constant lags, slow opening of pages, and high latency when typing, particularly on journal pages. I opened GH issues, I saw other people with the same problem, and pretty much no resolution or feedback from the developers. Particularly, I noticed that I started to write less in my journals because the overall experience of writing was frustrating. Furthermore, the lack of progress, uncertain future, and abandonment of many plugins made the situation worse for me.
• I'm way past the phase of constantly experimenting with tools and building a perfect system. Years ago, I used to spend hours optimizing my Arch Linux installation. PKM tools and all "second brain" apps can be a time trap as working on optimizing your workflow feels like real progress, you get the mental reward of improving your life, but you end up not doing any actual work. Hence, I want to use a stable app with a certain future. Unfortunately, I don't have much trust in the multiple vibe-coded clones of Logseq, as these projects often end up being abandoned - starting a project is easy, the code is cheap today with LLMs, but the energy of authors tends to disappear once you have to focus on maintenance, bugfixing, and implementing hard features.
• Keeping my entire workspace in Markdown is a deal-breaker for me. I expect my working career to last for another 35+ years, and I expect that I will have to switch apps and notetaking systems every few years. As long as everything is in a standardized, human-readable, and easily accessible format, migration should not be an issue.
• I really, really liked the outlining mode of Logseq - writing in bullets and nesting them into blocks fits my thinking process very well. I liked the tasking system and the ability to track all missed deadlines, together with custom queries - I need to juggle multiple independent projects at my work, and I'm prone to missing tasks and deadlines, and forgetting to update progress.
• I didn't really use whiteboards or graph view in Logseq. I used some tasking plugins, tabs, a Kanban board, interstitial plugin. I tried the Agenda plugin, but it somehow felt too complex and too disconnected from Logseq to use daily. Besides these, I also used the following plugins: citation manager for Zotero, journal calendar, TODO master, bullet threading, and habit tracker.

As you can see, I'm not excited about Logseq's migration to DB. I know there's Logseq OG, I know there's a planned export feature from DB to Markdown files, but I'm a bit skeptical about the future of these tools - splitting repos suggests to me that developers don't want to maintain both versions in sync, and I'm quite concerned that future DB versions will receive functionality that will no longer be compatible with Markdown.

After a very long consideration, I decided to give Obsidian a shot. It's not perfect (not open source), and the writing mode is different from Logseq. I implemented the entire migration while at a conference three weeks ago; it took roughly two afternoons while listening to talks all the time. I took a migration script from GitHub and threw it at Claude, basically giving it examples of my notes and iterating until the migrated workspace looks roughly correct in Obsidian. Then, I implemented and configured a set of official and community plugins.

What worked well?

• The workflow is slightly different, so you have to get used to that, but it comes pretty quickly. After a week, I no longer noticed any friction.

• Obsidian is much more responsive for me, and writing itself has become more pleasant. I want to write more, and writing is no longer causing any frustration.

• Over the years, I backed up my Logseq graph in a private Git repository. I did the same with Obsidian, but I also tested their basic Sync tier with E2EE, and so far, I'm pleasantly surprised. It worked seamlessly between my two systems (requiring only one app restart, as community plugins aren't synced by default), and even the Android app works great. I ended up delegating my git synchronization to the role of a secondary backup in case Obsidian fails.

• I didn't use Logseq's Android app because I synced everything through git; I also heard opinions that it was not on par with the desktop version in terms of features. I learned to take all my notes manually and then import them into Logseq on PC. I gave Obsidian's Android app a shot and tried their Sync for a month - so far, I'm quite positively surprised, but I have not used it extensively yet.

• Obsidian stores all plugin configurations in one subdirectory of your workspace; all in JSON. I found it much more intuitive and easier to synchronize (git) than storing them elsewhere, e.g., Logseq's choice of $HOME/.logseq/settings on Linux. This means that your plugin configuration is part of your workspace, so it can be easily synced between devices (but it doesn't always work as expected - see a comment below).

• I used Logseq namespaces heavily; during the migration, I replaced them with a standard directory hierarchy in Obsidian. Somehow, this helped me notice older notes that were improperly assigned (e.g., missing a namespace hierarchy or duplicated due to a typo).

• With just a few fairly popular plugins (nothing obscure like a "Logseq Mode in Obsidian" plugin with three GitHub stars and its last commit two years ago, i.e., a plugin likely to break soon), I was able to recreate the basic flow of Logseq: bullet points, outlining, task management, daily journals, namespace replacement, etc. Some features work out of the box, e.g., tabs with pinning. Overall, I'm using the following Obsidian plugins:

  • Daily Notes + Templates configured to custom journal paths and creating notes from my template.
  • Outliner (Logseq's style bullet points with indentation)
  • Auto Bullet (Tab inserts outline bullet point automatically). Important note: disable "half-width space" option, as it breaks the soft line break within a bullet (shift+enter).
  • Daily Notes Editor to get both automatic daily notes and the "journal view"
  • Tasks plugin (configured for the TODO -> DOING -> DONE cycle I used in Logseq + automatic switch between states with a hotkey like in Logseq.
  • Calendar plugin (it automatically reads the configuration from Daily Notes).
  • Dataview for queries.
  • Periodic Notes for automatic weekly note from my template (Calendar also seems to read that automatically).
  • Task Genius (only automatic progress bar for nested tasks - this plugin has many more features that I have not explored yet).

• I find Obsidian's choice of query language to be far superior. Dataview queries are SQL-like and very intuitive to write and debug, whereas I found Logseq's Datalog quite obscure. I had a complex "Projects" page where I searched for project pages under a specific namespace and categorized them by status - a simple dashboard to track all my personal projects, collaborations, and supervised students. It took me a lot of time to write those (pre-LLM days), and I had to look through multiple posts on the Logseq forum to find similar queries, since the query language does not seem to be well-documented. Migrating this to Obsidian was trivial, and the page size shrank from 470 lines to under 200.

• All basic features seem to work: block references, page references (just replace them automatically with a script, as Logseq keeps everything under pages and I didn't want to keep that in Obsidian).

• I'm also currently tinkering with the Day Planner plugin (fine-grained scheduling of tasks + calendar view of the day) and Notebook Navigator (improved left-side panel with more functionalities).

What didn't work well?

• Obsidian disables community plugins on new installations, and their configuration is not included by default in Sync. Once you start an app on a new system, you have to enable it explicitly and restart the app. Worked great on my second PC, but somehow didn't trigger immediately on Android. I'd classify this as minor friction - it finally started to work as expected.

• Not everything works in Obsidian; for example, PDF annotations aren't really a thing (unless I missed them). However, I realized I use these features quite infrequently anyway - I do all my PDF annotations on a tablet while reading, and then I import the annotated PDF into Zotero/Logseq.

• One feature I miss from Logseq is the automatic time measurement of a task in the DOING state. I was not able to recreate this.

• While Logseq's interstitial plugin inserts the date at the beginning of each line, Obsidian's TimeStamper always inserts it under the cursor position. A bit frustrating at the beginning, but you get used to it.

• Notebook Navigator has its own calendar, but it ignores my Daily Notes configuration and looks for daily notes in the wrong place. Easy to ignore, as I primarily use the main Calendar.

• Logseq does not seem to create an actual note that only exists through links and has no content. When using the "Find orphaned files and broken links" plugin in Obsidian, it creates many false positives, as a link to a non-existing note is considered a broken link.

Summary

Is Obsidian the same as Logseq? No. Is the migration frictionless? No. Is every feature of Logseq also available in Logseq? No, but for me, the missing ones weren't daily drivers. Is Obsidian the best choice for every Logseq user? No.

But was the transition hard? Also no. Am I happier with my PKM now? Yes. Am I writing longer notes? Yes. Does the app encourage me to write more frequently? Yes. Do I feel comfortable that my app won't be abandoned, my workflow will stay roughly constant for years, and sync will not break my data? Yes.

In the end, I'm not a PKM fanatic who will spend hours on tinkering, optimizing the plugin section, and polishing the entire app configuration to have the perfect digital version of Zettelkasten. I want a tool that works reliably and does not cause any friction in my writing and brainstorming process. Logseq was such a tool for almost 5 years, and I'm extremely grateful for that to the developers, plugin authors, and the fantastic Logseq community. Today, that tool for me is Obsidian, and let's see how it goes.