Maybe they should, but focusing on adding new features endlessly is how we ended up with this state of internet browsers. The most complex app running on a desktop are too big, it’s basically impossible to create a new one. (Yes you can fork but that’s just adding toppings to ice cream). The browser war ends only one way.
If we break up the do-everything application into significant parts then a healthy “war” can exist. Why does a browser need to play video, you already have an app for that.
The Gemini I know is “an application-layer internet communication protocol for accessing remote documents, similar to HTTP (Hypertext Transfer Protocol) and Gopher”. It’s not used much but it could be part of a useful alternative to the, now Google controlled, internet. Maybe Google named their project Gemini to obfuscate a potential competitor for simple web pages (or perhaps both project teams are bad at choosing names - if Gemini isn’t a human cloning machine you’re doing it wrong).
I don’t understand how one could think brain implants is a totally safe invention for a society. Did you consider more possibilities than just manipulating people into to physically attacking others?
There are people out there with short-range, wireless pacemakers with no security. Most just provide information you’d expect but some of them are also defibrillators (they can kill). As far as I know none have been harmed in an hacked attack but a hacked brain implant brings to mind more than just killing the owner. We may have an interest as a society in making this illegal because it’s not worth the gamble to us for people’s actions to be hijacked remotely.
Hopefully most have a tech literate friend within their circle, and the wherewithal to test their assumptions. It falls to the tech literate create the alternatives and preach the values of software freedom.
Even the worst people in history were at some point just a child that we could have potentially saved. Even as an adult, or after doing evil, I think sympathy and compassion never stops being the right answer. It’s just in practice we have to prioritise: the needy, the many.