system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: Cows are Technology

Not just cows, but most domesticated animals, corn, squash, and most other fruits and vegetables can be considered technology and a human invention in the same way that my phone is.

All of these things have been modified from their original natural forms in significant ways.

The fact that they are living does not make a distinction. If corn didn't exist and we invented it tomorrow by genetically modifying grass in a lab it would not only be considered technology but would be patentable.

The fact that they were created by selecteive breeding does not make for a distinction here either. Under that reasoning a lot of computer algorithms would not count as technology either, as they were developed by itterative artificial selection in a similar way.

There is no reason to think of domesticated plants and animals as being any less a technological invention than a car.

Edit: the best point I've seen made here so far is that technology is knowledge, not the thing itself. Therefore cows (plural) are technology but cow (singular) isn't. By the same note cars are a technology, but your car isn't, because the technology is the understanding. This is different than how I think people colloquially think of technology, but is a robust definition. It does however mean that cows are still technology, in the same way as all other technological understanding, if anyone wants to hash that out.
gpt
>All of these things have been modified from their original natural forms in significant ways.

I think the key part is that not every individual object was altered or "built" - their breeding is definitely "technology", but the process is not.

I think what you're saying is akin to saying that "water is technology because it comes out of faucets".