I think 1 and 2 are more the issue, but possibly all of them. They are all loose definitions that mean different things to different people. I think it would limit serious uptake once a legal department gets a hold of it.

(1) discriminating against marginalized communities

What does this mean? I bet I could get several different answers. Old people are marginalized by agism in tech, does this mean tech companies can't use this? How would they prove they don't marginalize old people?

(2) building tools that disingenuously manipulate public opinion

Ditto. To me this means no political party or marketing/advertising department can use this. Probably most news outlets as well.

(3) building tools of mass surveillance and prediction to repress the rights of people

Rights defined by whom? US Constitution? Right not to be offended? Rights granted by the Taliban or ISIS? Communist China?

(4) building tools that control weapons, including tools that automate the deployment, operation, and targeting of weapons.

I think most people can get on board with this one, unless we were attacked in earnest by a strong military foe.

If you have a political position that all weapons are bad and all surveillance is bad then I think that is a deeply flawed viewpoint. What we want to avoid is improper use of weapons and surveillance. Where those things go into the realm of abuse. Of course, "abuse" is a subjective word for these things too, but I think there's a general consensus that some things are bad.

> What we want to avoid is improper use of weapons and surveillance

All use of weapons and surveillance is abusive, so what you are saying "we" (who?) want is not something that I find reasonable.

Do you think that having a camera in your backyard constitutes surveillance? Does a baby monitor constitute surveillance? Does a drone with a camera constitute surveillance? It can be used for this, after all.

No matter what you think, the authors might disagree, so you have no way of using the software in anything related to it. Worse yet, this can quickly change - the system you built that uses this software in the background might be totally fine to watch a womans shelter, but the license could be pulled any minute because the authors dislike that you also sold your product to a normal prison.

All rules can be interpreted maliciously, that doesn't mean there shouldn't be any.