People are basically wrong about time predictions, but I believe, science have almost caught up with the imagination.
One thing I thought of, is, that in order to create something new nowadays you need to know more and deep(lots of things already created), and that can be a problem (technological singularity?).
But maybe, we'll catch up with the helping hands of devices such as Musk's Neuralink, augmenting brains, that would be good.
In general, mankind, generation after generation, creates more sandboxes to the greatest lives of their offsprings. Take the laws, for example. Relatively easy to follow, but to change, you in most cases need to unfold all the reasons, why such law was brought, what consequences will alternatives have and so on and so on.
Yep, we're soothing children of the greater systems of our ancestors.
I'm not sure we slowed down.
Where did we slow down, from your point of view? Like, we've got Twitter instead of flying cars?)
@much_applied To be fair people writing about dystopian future (albeit not sci-fi as you mean it, I'd agree with that) were not that far away. I've re-read Fahrenheit 451 recently, it's surprisingly accurate. So I guess, the reason for pure sci-fi is because it is too crazy, but a more moderate vision has been proved to be alright. But I guess it's a form of survivor's bias. If sci-fi writers were right, we would say that the other ones were not bold enough.
@emmanuelhadoux 'Brave new world' hits the current present with frightening precision too, in group thinking and "Every one belongs to every one else"- thing. But I'd still rather live now, though nostalgic/romantic lenses are always on the eyes, glaring in the past)