Paolo Bacigalupi is reading a SF novel -- which he is very careful not to name -- and finding that it has a lot of SFnal background details that don't actually add anything to the story. He's coined the term "futurizing" for this effect, and mulls the question over a bit.

It's an interesting question -- I've seen readers reject stories as "not SF" due to the lack of "futurizing," and there's definitely a deep strain in the field that wants and loves those intricately-thought-out, eyeball-kick future details. But if they don't have anything important to do with that particular story, do they belong?