I've been using the web for 20 of those years. The browsing experience is, structurally, mostly the same. We did online payments back then, there was chat, there was multimedia consumption, from back when it was a buzzword.
You're making a substantial confusion between new modes of consumption and uses cases versus the individual technologies that support them. Flash, VRML, Applets and other technologies we just the mediums there were back then, but fundamentally they're all just a method to consume rich content and to bypass feature limitations of browsers, many of which have been lifted by now.
Crypto can have a limitless number of various underlying technological substrates, but the fundamental idea is still about a decentralized financial instrument.
Regardless of the implementation details of said technology, it will always face the same issues the current financial system faces: regulatory controls, KYC, requirements for taxation, legal limitations in its uses for money laundering and hiding crimes, and a long list of etceteras. That has little to do with technology, and a lot to do with international legal frameworks, politics, lobbying, and a long list of etceteras where the dynamics are not really different from that of other industries.
None of those issue will, generally speaking, be solved by technology, because they are related to the way that human institutions work. And the products built upon that technological substrate are still limited by our known principles in how people consume digital tools.
The things about web3 is that none of the supporters fundamentally address the latter areas. I don't see compelling products where the technological substrate really "changes everything". I don't see the proponents address the very real institutional and social issues around it.
For the most part, I see the same misguided idealism I saw in the web of the past, where various proponents of libertarian ideological strains waxed poetic about how the freedoms brought by new technology will dramatically alter social dynamics. How we believed that immediate access to the world's knowledge would makes us wiser and help us progress towards peace and unity.
If anything, a deep study of the exponential advance of technological developments of the last century should shows that human nature is pretty impervious to change.
There is a rich history of developers saying something is the future and being wrong. Generally speaking, when a dev says something is Important or The Future of Tech, it means they think they can make a few bucks out of it or they enjoy working with it. We have no special insight into what's going to happen in 10 years time. Guessing is fun and there's no reason to stop, but there's no reason to believe anyone is right either, and that applies even more to groups.