* though I do think journals should take steps towards basic integrity checks, eg, computational reproducibility, but do it in house, not relying on reviewers. While those won’t catch most fraud, the errors detected could lead to extra scrutiny, some of which might uncover (or at least deter?) fraud

Honestly, I think quite a bit of fraud would be caught if people looked for basic errors, but I take your point. Either way, it's absurd for a journal not to care about the accuracy of the things that they publish!