You, as well as millions of others, obviously do not know what technology means.
The term "technology" means a production process. For instance a technology for baking bread. From the way the ingredients are mixed, to the conditions of baking to packaging, etc.
What you mean is technics. You cannot build technology. Fact is that 90% of the people are illiterate and do not realize what they're saying half the time.
Who cares? We all understood what he meant. Words exist to convey meaning in the context they are used. This isn't an academic paper, why be a dick about it?
Changing the word "technology" to "technics" in his post would not have changed the point he made at all. Besides I've never heard anyone refer to their microwave as technic. Common usage.
Yeah let's not overreact to misuse of the word "technology"? I edited my post to make it more clear.
I refuse to use the word "technics", but maybe someday I can still become literate like the zombie-guy...
Back on topic - of course I agree that money has increased the velocity of trade over the past 1,000 years or so,
and the increasingly global movement of money will only exaggerate such effects. Bitcoin has the potential to do
exactly this. In theory, accelerating trade should distribute goods and services more efficiently (especially if the
transaction costs are lower), resulting in higher quality of life?
However, if bitcoin moves in the direction Wall Street wants it to (speculative instrument, derivatives, etc.), it won't
create any tangible gain for society.