You can quantify innovation in tecnology by the output.
The old-fashioned artisan could produce so much during a day.
The first factories could produce more, for the same amount of labor.
The modern automated factory can produce even more.
The old-day huntergatherer needed a certain amount of land to feed a family.
Ancient, manual farming could feed mmore families on less land.
Modern farming even more so.
That's no better than quantifying information by counting words. What you suggest is not direct quantification of technology, but quantifying the results thereof.
And the task isn't easily accomplished. The gross output of a factory may be greater than that of an artisan, but the quality of the product is likely to be lower.
Of course not all technology results in increased output. Many of not most advances have no bearing whatsoever on increasing gross numbers.
And what unit does one apply to the measurements? If I invent a gizmo that attaches to a carburetor and increases the mileage of a car by 3%, while increasing horsepower by 7% and increasing torque by 9%, how much technology is involved? Are there 3 'Tech Units'? 7? 9? 3+7+9 = 19 TU's?
In the area of scientific instruments, how many TU's are involved when an instrument enables one to make more precise measurements? One can make just as many measurements with the old tech, so how do we measure this?
I could go on and on, an waste plenty of time; but I think we all understand that this is just one more case where double standards are applied. Technology cannot be quantified any more than other forms of information can.