Asad,
There is a tremendous amount of genetic variation between individuals, and its unlikely that there will ever be a definitive human sequence. (The same goes for all other organisms (chimps, etc.).) The work done on the project, then, doesn't really apply to the human population as a whole. Some critics have also pointed out that the population sample the researchers have drawn from is very euro-centric. A joke I like: once they complete the project "they'll tell us everything there is to know about one French farmer and a lady from Philadelphia."
Further, even if a definitive sequence was discovered, there are wide ranging and very far reaching implications for ethical, philosophical, and governmental institutions and more. Who defines normal? What is normal? And so on. [There is no normal!
Life is VARIATION!]
Also, only about 5 percent of the genome is an actual coding region. We've spent how much money and time on non-coding material? For what? For the pseudoscientists who search for any opportunity to interject "it must be the aliens"?
Asad, I must admit that I'm also wary, (and this is a bit of an understatement) of mega-collaboratives, and mega-projects. As far as I can see, they make money, but they are also very skilled at spending it*. There is a point at which group size obeys the law of diminishing returns, as well.
I don't feel the genome project is a good use of resources. Yes, it's neat, it's very public, but there is probably more to be accomplished on a smaller scale. The field of genetics is absolutely mind blowing in it's scope.
*As a tangent, ask me about college football (american) and $1 million dollar basketball coaches sometime.