>> Again, statistically. On average, people of all colors don't have an uncle at a hedge fund...

Huge numbers of people I went to undergrad with had uncles at hedge funds or big law firms. Those are the people I was competing with for entrance. You're absolutely right, I was never competing with many people in the Midwest (of all races) who had it worse than me because large populations amongst the Ivy League schools come from ~2 dozen high schools. My high school was proud to produce 71 (i think, something around that) students who proceeded into Ivy League schools from our graduating class (for whatever that is worth.) It is even more with 5 other NYC schools and a couple on Massachusetts.

Finally, You dont need to believe my anecdotes -- you can read hundreds of first-hand accounts online. When the "Tiger Mom" NY Times article and book came out, you chould see the outpouring of condemnation of some of this NY (and broader) Asian subculture -- a lot of it was from Asians like myself.

I encourage you to read the comments section of that famous article as well as the dozens of offshoot conversations and heated debate that ensued over the persoanl/emotional/psychological cost of success at any cost mentality.

>>> Huge numbers of people I went to undergrad with had uncles at hedge funds or big law firms.

Yes, in a top school in NY.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not for "penalising" or "rewarding" anyone for their skin color. I hope you didn't get that message from me.

I am way more into personalised life experience reward/penalty system. And that should be limited to scholarships based on socio economic situation, not test scores.

>> Yes, in a top school in NY.

Well that is sort of my point...When Asians compete for spots at top universities, they arent really competing against the entire united states, they are competing against the applicant pool.

Ivy League schools get more valedictorian applications than there are seats. Some get more perfect SAT scores than there are seats, so they end up using other factors like sports, well-rounded-ness, speaking ability, unique experiences, etc.

A lot of the folks in that applicant pool have all sorts of unique experiences -- summar safaris in africa, a performance at Lincoln Center, summer internship at a major law firm, internship at some Congressperson's office, etc, etc.

Those types of non-academic admissions factors disfavor most minorities (they espcially disfavor those of African descent given the lack of diversity in most of those fields, which is why i can appreciate affirmative action for clearly underpriviledged groups.)

Now, things are getting better for Asians, Indians, etc and are certainly better than what they were in 1996 when I applied to college. People always tend to point at Nadella, Pandit, Pichai -- but seriously -- how much of the real power base in the US is actually diverse?

Looking beyond technology into the broader economic, cultural, media, and political base of the US, can anyone really argue that Asians are so well represented that they deserve Negative application points relative to all others?