Not pointing any fingers (cough Microsoft cough Apple cough) but the problem that most people have with 'copying features' is when the copier tries to claim that it was their 'innovation' or that they've got some claim to fame because they 'copied it better.'
They took a rendering engine, made some changes to allow tabs to be run as their own process, and took a year to implement an underwhelming and feature-sparse extension system.
What is the big achievement? Mozilla created their own rendering engine. And I don't think that's a bad thing. I think we'd be worse off in a world where the sole choices are Trident and WebKit.
Ironic, since indiejade has been here about 10x as long as you. Perhaps if you can't stick to the issues and avoid childish flamebait like that, this isn't really the community for you.
(And yes, I'm aware of the irony)
There's absolutely nothing wrong with stealing features from a competitor, that's how progress is made. Chrome is not some sort of anti-consumer "forced ad consumption" monstrosity that you seem to make it out to be. By every measure it very much seems to be an attempt by Google to raise the bar for web browsers. Key indicators of this being: they have leveraged existing open source software (webkit); have put a lot of effort into standards compliance, javascript performance (v8), and forward looking standards adoption (html5 and css 3 features, web sockets, etc.); a drastically open development process (even more so than firefox, with much easier access to dev builds); an incredibly fast development pace (Chrome is barely 1 year old); and have made the vast majority of their work open source with the Chromium project. To every indication they want to prove what can be done with browsers and very much hope other browsers copy them.
If you look at Chrome and all you see is yet-another-tabbed-browser then I question whether or not Hacker News is the correct community for you to hang out in.