This exemplifies why the provision is so bad. DEI is a term of art, not a specific thing. Everyone is proud of PyPI for standing up for whatever they think DEI means, but they don’t define or explain it so it doesn’t actually mean anything. Or rather it can mean anything at all. That’s the danger to the organization.
The way it’s written it’s impossible to know if you’re complying or not. They might have just said “don’t be woke” or “don’t piss us off”.
An administration that uses LLMs and Ctrl + F and vibes for policy decisions that don’t sound good even before you realize they don’t make sense, and ignores courts and due process… it’s a hazard to touch.
Yet another horrible thing that apparently exists. Boooo.
Especially in light of how incompetent this administration is, and how bad it is at clearly communicating ideas, they made the only sensible choice. Maybe there’s more details in the grant terms itself, but from the article it looks like it just says “don’t advance or promote DEI”, and without explicitly defining what they mean by that they are setting up a trap.
PyPI is smart not to take the money.
If the article is to be believed there’s also a provision there saying that they cannot engage in any programs that advance or promote DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion). That part’s new, and it’s honestly not well defined. What is DEI? Racial quotas and discrimination? Cultural acknowledgements? Anti-discrimination? All these things have been called DEI. Some of these things have been called the other. Without clarity, the likeliest definition is “whatever annoys the administration”.