科技媒体 Windows Report 今天（11 月 29 日）发布博文，报道称在 Nightly 频道最新版火狐 Firefox 浏览器中，Mozilla 正测试“标签页备注”（Add Note）原生功能，有望解决用户因开启过多标签页而遗忘浏览目的的痛点。

**Mozilla is “rewiring” itself to put AI at the centre of everything: what it builds, why it builds it, and how it makes money.** Going forward, every product in Mozilla’s portfolio, including Firefox, will need to “design their strategies” and “measure their success” by how much AI is added and, more worryingly for ‘public interest’ projects, how much cash its AI features generate. Target: 20% yearly growth in non-search revenue – around $25 million a year. Mozilla says this is necessary to save the web (and humanity) from big AI, and to give users more “agency” and “choice”. But is this really about a moral crusade to wrestle control from billionaire tech owners on behalf of their users (as it frames it), or a simple, cynical survival plan to woo the exact same billionaire tech owners into giving it cash in exchange for integrations? Goggles on, as it’s about to get snarky. ## Mozilla AI Rewire Explainer **Name:** Mozilla’s “Rewiring” Strategy. **Age:** New and years too late. **Appearance:** Mission statement/business pitch/survival plea. **Tl;dr?** To “do for AI what they did for the web”. They nostalgia about it beating _Internet Explorer_ to free us from the yoke of Yahoo! toolbars, virus scan pop-ups and wonky web standards? They’ve repackaged it as a crusade against “Big AI”. **Fighting talk – what’s the battle plan?** For the next three years, every Mozilla product must add AI features with a view to generating money. Mozilla calls it their “Double Bottom Line”, placing revenue on equal footing with their mission. **Which one matters most?** Well, you can’t pay a CEO with “mission”. **But they’re the good guys.** The plan is to create a “sovereign” open-source AI ecosystem. They want to raise a “rebel alliance” of smaller projects to help fight the Big AI Empire. **I don’t like sci-fi.** It’s like Greenpeace announcing eco-friendly oil rigs. **I also don’t like strained analogies.** Fine. Mozilla lacks compute and cash to build and train its own AI tech, so all of the local AI features it and its rebel alliance will offer use ‘open weight’ models, mainly those provided by Meta’s llama. These may be licensed openly (for now; Zuck can change it any time) but was purportedly trained on material of dubious origin. **Mozilla must really like AI.** Actually, they blame Big AI for filling the web with “slop.” **So they are stopping the slop?** No, their solution is to make more slop buckets available (their “First Choice” agentic stack) so more people can join in. But since they are Mozilla-branded slop buckets, I think that makes it RIGHT ON. **My head hurts.** I think confusion is the point. Mozilla takes pot shots at Big AI while striking deals with them to integrate their chatbots in its browser. They promise “sovereignty” in AI features, but will build them using bricks stamped “Property of Meta”. **But at least choice is good.** Mozilla name-checks “choice” a lot. But currently, the choice is which which Big AI chatbot do you want in your sidebar, right-click context menus and search bar? Do you want to browse the web normally or in Firefox ‘AI Window’ mode? **AI Window?** A new prompt-based way to use Firefox coming in 2026. Called a “window” but it pulls the curtains closed and describes the view to you instead of, y’know, you see it. **At least tell me _that_ will be optional.** Mozilla say they won’t “force” anyone to use AI in Firefox or Thunderbird and that “classic mode” will be available. **But?** They _also_ say they will work “just as much on AI as on the web” and have tied these features to engorged revenue targets. You don’t make millions by hiding new features in a settings menu hoping someone “opts-in”. Ergo: prepare for the nags. **And if an AI feature is useful but doesn’t make money?** It’s ‘cooked’, as Australians would say. **Is Mozilla cooked?** Not yet. But between AI pivots, ad-tech ventures, layoffs, cuts to web advocacy, engineers restructures, bumper CEO pay… This latest ‘rewiring’ sparks more ‘save the company’ than it does ‘save the web’. **Do ask:** “Remember when Mozilla stood for something more than revenue targets?”. **Don’t ask:** “Did they consult an electrician on this ‘rewiring’ or just ChatGPT, cos…?” * * * _This is part of ourExplainer series, where we chat through the What and How of whatever is happening in the wider Linux scene to find out if it’s actually worth caring about._

When a webpage’s content exceeds the viewport height, browsers typically introduce a vertical scrollbar. This can lead to layout shifts, especially when navigating between pages or toggling content visibility, as the presence or absence of the scrollbar alters the available width for content.

PortableApps.com is proud to announce the release of Mozilla Firefox®, Portable Edition 145.0.2. It's the Mozilla Firefox browser bundled with a PortableApps.com launcher as a portable app, so you can take your browser, bookmarks, settings and extensions on the go. And it's open source and completely free. Firefox Portable is a dual-architecture 64-bit and 32-bit (optional)

As artificial intelligence advances, social media platforms multiply, and global tech giants dominate, a pressing question has emerged in Africa’s tech evolution: who truly owns the data generated by Africans? The consensus was clear at the recently concluded AI Summit in Abuja: data belongs to the people. Tech leaders, policymakers, and civil society experts gathered at the summit on Wednesday, November 26, 2025, to call for a new era of African digital sovereignty. Stakeholders argued that Africa must embrace community ownership models and homegrown AI tools to reclaim control, ensure fair compensation, and shape its digital future. Kiito Shilongo, Senior Tech Policy Fellow at the Mozilla Foundation, emphasised the importance of transparency and community co-creation in managing personal data. “What models are we using or adapting to make sure that it is transparent, that we are co-creating with the community? What are we doing from a grassroots level?” she asked. The Mozilla Foundation is exploring data compensation primarily through its Data Futures Lab and the newly launched Mozilla Data Collective. These initiatives experiment with models that give individuals and communities more control over their data and enables them to derive value from it. Early research at the lab examined “data dividends” and direct payments to users, noting that compensation can both signal the value of data and build trust. At the same time, it raises crucial questions about reducing privacy to a purely financial transaction. The Mozilla approach focuses on data stewardship, community governance, and alternative data institutions, asking how data can empower communities instead of simply fuelling extractive business models. Contributors—whether individuals or communities—can retain ownership of their datasets (such as Common Voice audio, single-speaker text-to-speech voices, and community text datasets, set prices) and receive the full amount from any commercial transaction. Buyers pay a modest 5% platform fee to support the service rather than intermediaries or ad-tech companies. Contributors can also choose to share data under open licenses or limit its use to purposes aligned with their values, such as research, education, or accountability. This structure allows a flexible range of data-sharing options, from monetised to pro-bono transactions, while ensuring that control remains firmly in the hands of the data owners. Shilongo stressed that compensation for data need not be solely financial. Communities can also benefit from insights and applications derived from their data. This perspective reframes data from a mere corporate resource into a communal asset with tangible value for individuals and the broader society. ## Get The Best African Tech Newsletters In Your Inbox Select your country Nigeria Ghana Kenya South Africa Egypt Morocco Tunisia Algeria Libya Sudan Ethiopia Somalia Djibouti Eritrea Uganda Tanzania Rwanda Burundi Democratic Republic of the Congo Republic of the Congo Central African Republic Chad Cameroon Gabon Equatorial Guinea São Tomé and Príncipe Angola Zambia Zimbabwe Botswana Namibia Lesotho Eswatini Mozambique Madagascar Mauritius Seychelles Comoros Cape Verde Guinea-Bissau Senegal The Gambia Guinea Sierra Leone Liberia Côte d'Ivoire Burkina Faso Mali Niger Benin Togo Other Select your gender Male Female Others TC Daily TC Events TC Scoop Subscribe ## **Learning from global models: The South Korean example** Oluwaseun Adepoju, Managing Partner at Co-Creation Hub, believes Africa can learn from international examples to develop local data governance structures. He points to South Korea, where the government’s MyData framework functions similarly to a data cooperative. Licensed providers aggregate and manage individuals’ financial—and increasingly other—data, allowing citizens to access, control, and move their information across banks, insurers, and fintechs. In addition, the country’s robust cooperative culture ensures that people’s interests are represented and protected. “For every 50 people, there is a data commissioner,” Adepoju explains. “We can replicate that (in Africa) where, as an institution, there is a voice that speaks when it comes to compensation for data.” Adepoju suggests practical ways to operationalise data cooperatives in Africa, including experiments where individuals can exchange data for value, platforms for data donation, and engagement of startups alongside academic institutions. He emphasises that compensation mechanisms must remain experimental to identify what works best in local contexts. ## **The high stakes for creators and cultural industries** The stakes are particularly high for creative industries. Kwabena Offei-Kwadey of Quantum LC Company raises concerns about how artists and musicians will be compensated in an era where AI can generate music at scale. “How are they going to be compensated, given that your favourite artist is no longer your favourite artist? The sovereignty of our data lies with us, not with Big Tech,” he says. Offei-Kwadey calls for representatives who can protect those unable to advocate for themselves, ensuring that creators are not left behind in the digital economy. Chioma Agwuedo, Executive Director of TechHerNG, highlights the risks of cultural erasure and bias embedded in AI systems. “We are training LLMs [large language models] that, if you dress in a certain way, you could be flagged as a terrorist. Same with black people dressing in a certain way. We are training LLMs to discriminate against our speech. We are losing our standing, and that is so dangerous.” Agwuedo argues that Africa must develop its own AI training infrastructure to reflect local contexts, languages, and cultural norms. She notes that current language models are disproportionately expensive for African languages; generating one token in English costs one unit, but four units for Yoruba. “We need to control the narrative,” she said. Seyi Olufemi, Country Director at NUBIA AI, echoes this sentiment. Literacy and understanding are key to consent, he stressed. “If people can understand what they are signing into, they can probably withdraw their consent. We need to have a localisation of all our efforts—building these AI tools ourselves and bringing data centres here. The answer to governance is that we must start building these tools ourselves before we start talking about compensation.” **_Read also:Nigeria’s AI bill puts control first, but at what cost to innovation?_** ## **Global lessons: The power dynamics of platform control** The challenges of digital sovereignty are not unique to Africa. In 2024, Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court ordered Twitter (now X) to be blocked nationwide after the platform repeatedly failed to comply with court orders aimed at curbing disinformation and threats to democratic institutions. Justice Alexandre de Moraes imposed hefty daily fines, froze assets—including those of Starlink—and directed telecom companies to enforce the ban until X complied. The court framed its actions as part of a broader anti-disinformation campaign following the January 8 coup attempt. Elon Musk responded by framing the suspension as a threat to democracy. During the confrontation with Brazil’s Supreme Court, he publicly encouraged Brazilians to bypass the ban using technical workarounds, including VPNs, and promoted Starlink as a means to access the platform even as domestic internet providers were ordered to block it. Brazilian authorities saw these actions as attempts to defy court orders. In response, Justice de Moraes froze Starlink’s local bank accounts and threatened heavy fines for any users or services attempting to circumvent the ban. The episode highlights the immense power governments can exercise over digital platforms and underscores the risks of entrusting data control to foreign entities. It serves as a cautionary tale for African nations seeking to assert digital sovereignty and protect their citizens’ data. ## **Building local capacity and redefining regulation** For Africa, these examples serve as both a warning and an opportunity. Toyosi Akerele-Ogunsiji, CEO of Rise Network, argues that African governments have a dual role; while regulation must be measured, they must also engage on behalf of citizens to ensure foreign platforms do not undermine national interests. She emphasises that African digital policy must focus on solutions and capacity building. Her work in producing Makemation, Africa’s first AI-driven feature film, highlights how storytelling and evidence-based advocacy can democratise AI literacy and empower youth. According to Akerele-Ogunsiji, the lack of a harmonised data infrastructure in countries like Nigeria, home to over 200 million people, requires indigenous platforms and tools. “The solution is that Nigeria needs to build its own Twitter, its own Facebook,” she said. “If you give young people the tools and digital literacy, they’ll build it in six months.” Timi Olagunju, partner at The Timeless Practice, adds that regulation alone cannot ensure digital sovereignty. In Africa, regulation often serves to protect established foreign players while stifling local startups, he said. “What regulation will do is keep foreign companies at an advantage over local companies just starting,” he noted. Olagunju argues that strengthening existing frameworks, such as the Nigerian Data Protection Act, and developing harmonised regional policies is more effective. He emphasises the importance of auditing, accountability, and local representation in global platforms to ensure African voices are not marginalised. ## **Community-owned models as a path forward** Community-owned data models offer a practical pathway to Africa’s digital future, blending grassroots participation highlighted by Shilongo, cooperative governance frameworks championed by Adepoju, and cultural and linguistic localisation emphasised by Agwuedo and Olufemi. By building local platforms, data co-operatives, and accountable oversight systems, African countries can reclaim digital sovereignty, secure fair compensation for creators, and protect the continent’s cultural and linguistic heritage. “For citizens to act meaningfully, platforms must be built with transparency and accountability at their core,” said Gabriel Odunsi, Program Manager at TechSocietal. “Because design choices can either empower or take control away from them.” South Korea’s experience offers a model worth adapting. While the country does not formally legislate data co-operatives, its MyData framework functions in a similar spirit—granting citizens the right to access, move, and control their personal data through licensed intermediaries. Combined with the country’s strong co-operative culture and active civic participation, this approach demonstrates how meaningful agency over data can be achieved. For Africa, adopting cooperative-style governance—whether through formal legal structures or community-led platforms—could transform personal data into a shared resource rather than a commodity dominated by foreign tech giants. Ultimately, the trajectory of Africa’s digital economy hinges on who controls the data. Without local ownership, the continent risks reinforcing long-standing patterns of dependency, exploitation, and cultural erasure. But with community co-creation, cooperative governance, localised AI development, and robust legal protections, Africa can ensure that data works for its citizens rather than against them. As digital infrastructure expands, prioritising models that empower communities, reflect cultural context, and fairly reward individuals will be essential.