> plenty of people in tech have PhDs or other degrees which are significantly more difficult than those required for finance, law or media. Its just more meritocratic than those fields which rely heavily on nepotism.

That's quite a self-serving narrative for us on HN. Do we have any evidence that the degrees are harder to get or that tech is more meritocratic?

> Tech is also significantly less white and full of immigrants (because of the meritocracy)

Tech's diversity record isn't evidence of meritocracy. Compare women in law, business, and media and those in tech, for example. It also may be that law, business, and media require exceptional cultural communication and understanding, which may be hard for a new immigrant to learn.

Yes its definitely harder for a new immigrant to understand the cultural norms required to work in a law or media (i think plenty work in "business"). But the fact that a field requires a particular cultural background makes it less meritocratic. Hiring people who are "like you" is the furthest possible thing from meritocracy. Technology work is generally pure logic, which is pretty universal and universality breeds meritocracy. In terms of the degrees being harder I don't have hard evidence, but having done some humanities and some math I think its pretty obvious which type of work is more complex.

I have definitely been on the wrong end of jokes about working in a trade within political and legal circles! But this might depend on the country