Once could make the argument that having an MBA is actually a hinderance in tech...
I reckon this comes form the American/British style tradition of going straight to college, graduating at 22 and then starting a career. In Europe styding/working isn't a mutually exclusive, binary option. It's not uncommon to graduate at 25 or even 30, whether that's because of mandatory military service, self-funding study concurrently with studying, finding interesting opportunities while at university, pursuing arts/theatre/sport, etc.
In fact, I've never disclosed my age to employers whether during or after hiring. Since it can't be easily deducted from graduation years, I've had people estimate anything from 19-40 in the past few years.
If you are comparing two potential hires, the age should be irrelevant. Experience, skill and future value (including fit and other subjective aspects) vs. their price (salary) is pretty much the only relevant consideration.
You might even be right, but just writing it without any supporting evidence isn't adding much to this discussion.
By "technical skills", do you mean programming? Because plenty of financial based technical skills are taught in MBA programs.
Of course, HN loves to blame MBAs for everything that goes wrong in tech companies; meanwhile, how many founders can't read financial statements, have no idea how to market, can't budget, can't do HR and get suckered in by VCs? Plenty. I think there's a direct correlation between people who think MBAs are "useless" and those who don't understand that running a business is much more involved and harder than it seems.
MBAs aren't required in tech in much the same way Computer Science degrees aren't required. But they're certainly valuable.