If you really want to measure rates of technical progress, you have to be rigorous and do it bottom up. I.e. decide in advance what you consider to be important, then go look at the trend. Cancer survival rates might be a good place to start.
On a side note, I also think you highly underestimate the technological advances that continue to be made under the infrastructural hood of the internet, b/c it's almost completely transparent. iPhone apps and websites in and of themselves may not be a big deal, but the growing scale of digital distribution channels and the level and scope of our interconnectedness certainly is. Not to mention, managing this growth in a way that is environmentally sustainable? Not a trivial engineering problem, and, in my estimation one of pressing concern...
1) Solar power is vastly improved today and on a trend that follows Moore's Law
2) Cell phones can be found all over the globe (all thanks to innovations in tech)
3) Rechargeable batteries are lasting longer and making it easier to take complex machines into difficult areas
4) The ability to talk, tap, and rotate our phones/screens is a big innovation
It's pretty impressive to me. Some of these are incremental pieces that are built on top of decades of research. However that does not diminish the true innovation that led to Lithium-Ion batteries being so dominant today vs. 10 years ago.
This is a direct result of hard-core hacking in sequence alignment software, advances in sequencing hardware, and piles of normal data management tasks being focused on helping flow the necessary information back to pathologists and doctors who make actual treatment decisions on this data.
I also think this is a "ground-floor" area in medical treatment. There is just a deluge of previously unknown results and even analysis techniques. This work just wasn't possible before . . .
But this requires major reform and a new way of thinking about society. And unfortunately, at the moment, right-wing ideologues are busy pushing an agenda that move us in the wrong direction and misses the real problem. (Most of the left-wing, btw, mean well, they just don't have much of clue either).
Certainly, engineers at large have a disgraceful record for enabling horrible technologies that are a detriment to society: surveillance, censorship, stacked financial systems, weaponry.
On the whole though, engineers are logical beasts. Perhaps you would have greater success convincing the HN community to spend their time on positive impact projects by researching and presenting compelling evidence that one or more areas they support are ultimately trivial and/or have a negative social impact.