Reading it a day later, I agree, it was unnecessarily strong, and your interpretation is correct. I am attacking the use of the "invisible hand" to mean "greed

Reading it a day later, I agree, it was unnecessarily strong, and your interpretation is correct. I am attacking the use of the "invisible hand" to mean "greed benefits everyone", a quite common (and frustrating, to me) abuse of the concept, but you are quite right that the specific use in the book does match the context - that users seeking their own benefit, unwillingly and unaware contribute to the good of the community. I am no longer permitted to edit the comment, but I offer my apology.