National Science Foundation (NSF) had offered $1.5 million to address structural vulnerabilities in Python and the Python Package Index (PyPI), but the Foundation quickly became dispirited with the terms of the grant it would have to follow.
“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 [diversity, equity, and inclusion], or discriminatory equity ideology in violation of Federal anti-discrimination laws,’” Crary noted. “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.”
Aren’t these contradictory? 🤔
They’re really pulling the childish ‘We’re just going to make up a fake acronym using DEI’ card in an official government communication?
This is a clown show
No. Employment is finite. Including someone means excluding someone else.
What DEI does (among others) is if there’s two candidates for the same opening with the same exact qualifications, the more marginalized will be hired. Before that, it wasn’t a random choice of lottery, but who looked “more trustworthy” (white) or “more competent” (neurotypical). White nationalists want to undo not only this, but to go back the days when blacks (etc.) were actually discriminated against, because their feelings and memories of calling someone “working like a n****r” (context: slavery + blacks in the segregation era often had to work way more for way less).
When I worked for the federal government, it meant outreach to minority communities, trying to get more to apply. Once they applied, they were on the same playing field as everyone else.
On a related note: Every time I see a video on Facebook of a crash caused by a tractor trailer, I see racist comments, guessing who the driver was, as though no white guy has ever wrecked a truck. It’s insane. It’s so deep in their heads that rational thought is gone.
Racists started to overanalize mistakes made by PoC as an attempt to try to discredit DEI practices.
Not necessarily. But your reaction is a good illustration of what the conservative narrative is when it comes to DEI.
DEI isn’t about excluding a majority to promote a minority, but to make sure being part of a minority doesn’t handicap someone.
But some people feels that it is in their right to exclude people they don’t like, which can be understable when it comes to not recruit someone who stole from you previously, but in most case it is based on prejudices against specific minorities. And that’s the main problem.
Those prejudices, most of the times based on misunderstandings, fear of the unknown, if not jealousy (antisemitism in Europe is often based on the idea that Jews perceived overall wealth is stolen from others).
Those prejudices greatly diminishes (or, as you wrote, “steals”) their chance to be chosed for well paid work (if not work at all), and to be represented in media like videogames (because of knee jerk reaction like that game where you steal back artifacts from museum got).
DEI, when not exaggerated to the extremes, is beneficiary for everyone involved. Recruiters find talents they wouldn’t have previously considered, people broadens their horizon by learning others culture, philosophy and history. Who in their right mind would refuse that, other that self-centered bigots?
In my case I’m glad of the diversity of people I meet at work. I don’t care if they are black or white, gay or straight, male, female, or anything in between. They are competent and hardworking, that’s the only metrics that should matters.
Nice hallucination, clanker. Fuck off.
Yeah, sure, a clanker gonna do grammar mistakes that he corrects many days later after waking up.
I suppose in your world everything you hate is woke, and everyone that isn’t like you is a clanker, right?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy
Eh, some DEI programs were discriminatory by having quotas, most were not. The one at my company was great, which was basically minorities giving talks about difficulties getting hired, promotions, etc. We didn’t have quotas, just reports.
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.
Yeah, I 100% respect Python for standing up to this nonsense. DEI should mean teaching people about their biases so we can do a better job of goving opportunities to those best able to do the job, instead of whoever is liked by the hiring team.
Grants like this shouldn’t have stipulations about how the project is run, only about the priorities, if any.
My point is merely that DEI programs can be discriminatory, not that they are.