I think the target is misplaced.

The basics of QM have long worked. When extended to a relativistic form with QED it worked very well (other than the renormalization problem). And the menagerie of particles that caused problems got a nice unified explanation with the Standard Model.

Physics works well all of the way down to the internals of the nucleus. QM as a framework works, and we have found that it works well across many orders of magnitude. (Quantum superpositions have been demonstrated all of the way up to macroscopic levels, including both superpositions in superconductor rings several feet across and demonstrations of the EPR effect. The latter of which may have practical consequences for the spooks.) This isn't news. It has been so for many years. Any theory that replaces QM (and they have been proposed) has to explain a lot of success.

In fact in the last hundred years we have had a series of weird predictions from QM turning into practical reality with huge consequences. Nuclear bombs. Transistors. Lasers. Holograms. Coming up are nanotechnology, quantum cryptographic channels and quantum computing. (One line of research that I wonder what happened to is the feasibility of manufacturing circuits as superimposed holograms of different materials. I wouldn't bet against it if they get the - admittedly difficult - technical details sorted out.)

That said, there are fundamental conceptual problems. Here are the biggies that I see:

1. Reconciling QM with GR.
2. Getting beyond the standard model.

Both are huge questions. Both have been open in roughly their current form for decades. Neither do we have the technology to experimentally challenge. And my opinion is that research on them has stalled out and moved from being science to a form of theology.

Cheers,
Ben