Trumpf is generating nanoscale EUV but I'm still hammer nails into the wall to support my coat hanger rod. What's up? Where's my flying cars, etc.
As a tangent, I think it's a time for reminder that life itself is nothing but molecular nanotechnology that we didn't invent and don't control yet. There are already nanomachines all around us, and we're all made of some. So whenever you use a piece of tech with an organic component (whether dead or alive), take a moment to ponder the extremely advanced nanotechnology involved ;).
You don't need a flying car - you need a hole which you can jump in and pop out at your destination with the least hassle.
If people wanted to burn money on certain super futuristic products, there would be more of them. But they've been judged not worth it.
There are glues for this nowadays if you want but personally I don't mind the screw or nail. Screws and nails are a 'good enough' solution for the problems they solve and anything else would have to be much better to really compete. The glue exists, you can buy it but it has a shelf life and does not have the same shear resilience that a screw or a nail would have.
Technology should first and foremost solve a problem.
Flying cars would create as many problems as they would solve, we barely manage with two dimensions, three would be a lot harder especially with large numbers of vehicles in the air. I don't see that working at all from a physics perspective but if we do somehow get it working to where it can compete favorably with regular vehicles on cost then it will require central traffic control.
Meanwhile, micro-machines are everywhere these days - MEMS accelerometers and gyros and SAW MEMS microphones are in every cellphone made, every smartwatch has similar features, DLP TVs have actually gone out of style but were micromirror devices, MEMS barometers and altimeters are cheap and commercial drones commonly have one or more, MEMS cell sorters and biochips are actually being used in production medical labs, the list just continues on for ages...
(I could go on a long aside about the households comment, but I'll save that rant for another time. Suffice it to say, we're doing jack shit with technology in homes, and that alone is hugely depressing. Innovation in that space seems to be sorely limited to what you can bring in and plug in to a socket, rather than disrupting home designs to better fit what our technology is actually capable of pulling off today - just look at the absolutely pathetic state of residential air conditioning, vs what can be done with passive cooling and occupant-aware HVAC systems.)
I think the problem there is the churn. If you built a 'smart home' ten years ago, it would be worse than useless now. I do think we're due a shift away from 110v outlets everywhere, but I think a house that's in keeping with the technical possibilities will have to wait until those possibilities have stabilized.
I know this is nitpicking, but still: I disagree. I think that home would be more useful than a smart home built today, because basic sensors and actuators today are very similar to those of 10 years ago, they talk over the same protocol (you screw your LED bulb into the same socket you used to screw an incandescent one into before), and most importantly, none of that was tied up with third-party Internet services. Consumer IoT of today is complete garbage because every vendor wants to be a platform, and doesn't want to interoperate with anything else. Back before IoT was a thing, home automation stuck to standards.
I know what you mean. I'm going to have to quote William Gibson on this:
"The future is already here — it's just not very evenly distributed."