Putting forward which upcoming technologies might change our lives is a challenging and exciting exercise; but it would be equally relevant to the readers if the Review would take on the less glamorous task of assessing which of these technologies flopped. The goal is not only to understand why some technologies have failed to meet their potential, but more to understand how the Review and its panel of experts came to make those mistaken predictions. This exercise of self-criticism would bring accountability back to the Review, potentially shedding light on various stakeholders involved in building and promoting certain technological futures. As important as it is to make predictions, it is equally important to admit and understand when these predictions fall flat.