While it is true that the term "web3" has been used (and sometimes overused) by VCs and other promoters to describe various blockchain and decentralized technologies, I would argue that Bitcoin does indeed qualify as a web3 technology as it enables peer-to-peer financial transactions without intermediaries or central control.

Additionally, with efforts such as Lightning Network focusing on facilitating seamless micropayments at fast times, Bitcoin is increasingly becoming foundational to the growth of new medium's in a decentralised way like making PeertoPeer or Decentralised Finance lending protocols possible which wouldn’t had before being introduced on this tech.

Nostr has aspects including encrypted message service signing mechanisms drawing from blockchain technological benefits whereas, hydrocore and hyperdrive & hence holescore have proven significant improvements upon their predecessors due such features among others like uncensorable network-like functionality also pulling from cryptographic field redundancy concepts while making real-time adoption easy sustainable.

Regardless of how any individual technology may or may not be labeled re web3 vernaculars evolving correct conclusions involve function utility value based approaches starting with evaluation between participating factors vs underlying context(s) And technology must match operational objectives rather than backtracking some marketing bullet points.