[luminaobscura]

If it was all socioeconomics, you could see that in the data. You would control for parent's income and/or education, and you would see disparity disappear.

I don't know what is the primary cause of disparities but i wouldn't assume it's all socioeconomics without evidence.

Maybe different groups are valuing things differently? For example, an Indian may try to migrate to US using PHD as a gateway. So they may be more willing to sacrifice and work hard. Or maybe for some groups PHD (or education in general) brings more prestige compared to others.

[epistasis]

My point is that socioeconomic differences resulting in different outcomes would be accepted as evidence of differences of opportunity. Because there's ample evidence of opportunities being different when growing up with fewer resources and more stresses.

There's also ample evidence of racial discrimination resulting in differences of opportunity, in all fields of science. But people are quick to assume that it doesn't exist, or are quick to point out any chance that it may even exist.

[luminaobscura]

If a group has "fewer resources and more stresses" "when growing up", we should try to address that directly.

This doesn't mean universities doesn't present equal opportunity.

The reason someone is not as capable may be just bad luck (bad parents etc.). But still, society should give positions to most capable ones.

[epistasis]

I would point out that the original claim was "equal opportunity," not merely "universities presenting equal opportunity."

And I agree that we should fix the systemic racism that causes unequal opportunity starting from early in in life.

And if we are to believe the stories that come from Black people that attempt degrees in CS, or STEM in general, they also face significant differences in opportunity at the university level as well. I'm inclined to believe these stories, as everytime I have spent some time investigating they have been true.