Why has computing has not advanced past the sixties?

Computer science, which has little to do with either computers or the scientific method, has progressed (or at least, laterally drifted around), of course, but computing has not. By that I mean the physical implementations of machines that can perform the process calculi that computer science dreams up. Back in the sixties, there was already talk of crafting binaries that contained data dependency information so that the processor could do unrestricted out of order execution. We still don't have that, despite overcoming the memory limitations of that time many times over. So many promising new innovations, but few even tried.

Are engineers just lazy? Did IBM, Intel, and Microsoft intimidate everyone enough to never focus on anything but their shitty, low-end trash?

>>3
I can do that in my head.