Back in January 2025, the Python Software Foundation applied for a $1.5 million grant from the US government’s National Science Foundation, under the Safety, Security, and Privacy of Open Source Ecosystems program, to address structural vulnerabilities in Python and PyPI. After a lot of paperwork, their application was approved, but upon receiving the contractual agreement, the Python Software Foundation decided to back out. Why?
We became concerned, however, when we were presented with the terms and conditions we would be required to agree to if we accepted the grant. These terms included affirming the statement that we “do not, and will not during the term of this financial assistance award, operate any programs that advance or promote DEI, or discriminatory equity ideology in violation of Federal anti-discrimination laws.” This restriction would apply not only to the security work directly funded by the grant, but to any and all activity of the PSF as a whole. Further, violation of this term gave the NSF the right to “claw back” previously approved and transferred funds. This would create a situation where money we’d already spent could be taken back, which would be an enormous, open-ended financial risk.
[…]In the end, however, the PSF simply can’t agree to a statement that we won’t operate any programs that “advance or promote” diversity, equity, and inclusion, as it would be a betrayal of our mission and our community.
↫ Loren Crary at the PSF blog
The fact that this is news at all is a deeply sad state of affairs, but it’s great to see at least some organisations in tech still have a spine. In a world where tech giants and their sleazy CEOs are falling over each other to lather the US president in bribes and tasteless gifts, it’s refreshing to see someone passing up on what would be an enormous amount of money for them. The PSF operates on a budget of $5 million a year, so $1.5 million would be a massive boon for the effort.
The efforts of the PSF regarding outreach have been incredibly successful over the years. PyCon US had 1% female speakers in 2011, 7% in 2012, 15% in 2013, 33% in both 2014 and 2015, and 40% in 2016. “DEI” efforts usually just mean the gruntwork of reaching out to members of underrepresented groups within your community, and ensuring they feel welcome, safe, and respected. Monocultures tend to be self-destructive, whether we’re talking about operating systems or people.
Having perspectives from people with different backgrounds, different life experiences, and different approaches is a massive net benefit to your organisation. Making efforts to foster such environments illegal is absolute batshit insanity, and I’m glad that unlike cowards like Tim Cook or Sundar Pichai, the Python Software Foundation has a spine and is standing up for what’s right.
It needs to be repeated, over and over again, that DEI does not mean quotas, and it doesn’t mean unqualified candidates are selected over qualified candidates,
That is 100% white supremacist propaganda, and a racist lie.
True.
Here is France you must have parity in election lists, regardless of qualifications of the candidates, or willingness to be part of a list. It is now in the law. If a list can’t get 50/50, it can’t get voted at all. In small cities it is a great problem.
I never understood the DEI stuff, just don’t bother about what the people doing the right job look like, being colored, painted, transitioned, whatever. You’re not supposed to make him/her a boy/girl/friend or a relative, just a colleague. If s/he is social and not a Karen, that the job is well done, why focusing on the origin/religion/sexuality/skin color ? Something scared of ?
The LGBTQIMYA2S+ movement can get pretty gnarly sometimes, but forbidding it for wrong reasoning isn’t any better.
Mankind should do better in 2025.