this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2025
1415 points (99.2% liked)
Technology
76424 readers
3456 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The PSF is (presumably) already required to comply with Federal anti-discrimination laws. Am I misreading the text or does it not actually create any new obligations for the PSF if they were to accept the grant?
a) the wording makes it legally ambiguous what exactly would constitute violating the text. If it just said "comply with anti-discrimination laws," that would be one thing.
b) It applies to the whole organization, not just the group accepting and applying the grant, making it very challenging to meet the requirement.
c) Unlike just about any other grant, the funds can be clawed back in the future if something was violated. This is not normal for a grant, and puts the entire organization's existence in jeopardy if they suddenly find themselves owing millions of dollars that had already been spent.
It's very likely their legal council told them under no circumstances should they accept the terms.
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".
They would be required to comply with the current administration's extremely biased and borderline illiterate interpretation of those laws.
You are misreading. These new obligations would require the PSF to violate those laws
It normalizes the anti-equity principles of the granting party, which now occupies the US govt.
The benefactor had already shown exactly how they treat people that aren't white Christian men, and it's up to schools, businesses and organizations like the Foundation to show resistance and inclusivity.