We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14488081 and marked it off-topic.
It is, if you stop to think about it, a little silly to argue that the success of Asians means there's no meaningful disadvantages to being African American.
Honestly, the failure to address that concern is one of the big reasons why nationalist and populist arguments are so persuasive.
Are you thinking of the term "WASP" in place of "white"? Italians and Greeks are 'W' but not 'ASP', and Irish are 'WAS' but not 'P' — but I think all three would be considered 'white' by people all around the world and I don't think that has changed.
Perhaps where you live where's a different capital 'W' version of 'White' (contrasted to 'white'), but that's not how most of the world looks at these groups. Do you think the people living Italy, Greece, and Ireland believe they are excluded from being 'white'?
For sure some of them are not white. Not that we should care much, unless we are dermatologists or something like that I guess.
"whiteness" has changed
Yes, the meaning of "whiteness" has evolved -- for sinister political reasons: equating "whiteness" with "successful" serves no useful purpose, other than covering up inconvenient facts like immigrants/Asians doing extremely well, which doesn't fit the left's convenient narratives. Twisting the meaning of "whiteness" really is an incendiary political mobilisation strategy, and you know it. It is a well-worn strategy of political mobilisation going back -- like almost everything on the contemporary political left -- to Lenin. I recommend you reflect on this moral failure of yours: Why not use something like "successful" instead of "white" from now on, otherwise you will continue to be part of the problem. In order to solve a problem, one needs a clear understanding of what causes the problem in the first place.
meaningful disadvantages to
being African American.
That's not really how enlightened discussions work. If you have the opinion that the "compiler doesn't care" and that it's somehow related diversity you have to make an argument to the fact. You can't just say that "it doesn't care" and have it be your opponents job to make an argument that disproves your opinion. At least not if your expect to base your opinions on merit.
The notion that compiler reflect the background and culture of those creating and using it isn't exactly far fetched. Of course something like a hobbyist background (historically only available to certain groups of people) is far more important in certain types of language and that the demographics of people differ between languages.
But that not even the point. What you value in the code you're writing is as much, if not more of a factor, in projects. So it doesn't necessarily matter if the compiler is unbiased since what's good code is going to be judged by people.
isn't exactly far fetched.
Edit: While it might seem confrontational, it's a serious question. This very short discussion is a great example how it's not a meritocracy at all. You get to make whatever insulting opinion you want without backing it up and if someone even slightly dare to talk back it's downvoted. Because people agree with you opinions even though they can't really state why.
The experience of a few people, which you haven't even stated but just used their names for your own cause, doesn't really talk to that of the majority of people. Nor does it explain how the culture of those creating a language wouldn't go into it. This is exactly the problem with opinion based discussion, you never have to answer anyone. So if your believe in merit in any way just answer the original question.
How does the experience of these people make it far fetched that compilers reflect the culture people making or using them?
It's a straight forward question and you've already stated that you hold this opinion, so it shouldn't be hard to give an answer to it.