even when they guessed right, they had a tendency to miss the point.

Jules Verne anticipated submarines, aircraft, and space travel but missed the social implications of those inventions completely. This, and some of the examples you pointed out suggest that SF has failed to be an effective social predictor as well as a technical forecaster.

The standard critical literary interpretation of science fiction during the Golden Age was that it's value came from examining the effects new technology would have on the human condition. If that is a correct analysis, then SF has failed miserably. For example, the anticipated advances in medical science have been substantial, but nobody predicted the high costs today of even the most routine medical procedures.

I think part of the reason for this is that science fiction is usually written and read by people who are optimistic about the role of science and technology in human affairs. They also tend to be rationalists and see technical problems which have technical solutions. This is why it appeals so much to young people, particularly well-educated ones. I know that as I have gotten older, my own enthusiasm about the future has been dampened considerably by the realization that just because something can be done does not mean it will be done. And whether or not it should be done is not always clear.