GitLab

For Christmas I received an intriguing present from a buddy - my extremely own "very popular" book.

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (great title) bears my name and my image on its cover, and it has glowing reviews.

Yet it was completely written by AI, with a couple of simple triggers about me provided by my pal Janet.

It's a fascinating read, and uproarious in parts. But it likewise meanders quite a lot, and is someplace between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It simulates my chatty design of composing, however it's likewise a bit repeated, and really verbose. It might have exceeded Janet's prompts in looking at information about me.

Several sentences start "as a leading technology reporter ..." - cringe - which might have been scraped from an online bio.

There's also a strange, repeated hallucination in the kind of my feline (I have no pets). And there's a metaphor on nearly every page - some more random than others.

There are dozens of business online offering AI-book composing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I contacted the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had sold around 150,000 personalised books, mainly in the US, considering that pivoting from putting together AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller expenses ₤ 26. The firm uses its own AI tools to create them, based upon an open source big language model.

I'm not asking you to buy my book. Actually you can't - only Janet, who produced it, can purchase any additional copies.

There is presently no barrier to anyone producing one in anybody's name, consisting of stars - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book contains a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is fictional, developed by AI, and designed "entirely to bring humour and delight".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the company, however Mr Mashiach stresses that the product is intended as a "personalised gag present", and timeoftheworld.date the books do not get sold further.

He wants to broaden his range, producing various genres such as sci-fi, and possibly using an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted type of consumer AI - offering AI-generated items to human consumers.

It's also a bit frightening if, like me, you write for a living. Not least since it probably took less than a minute to produce, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound much like me.

Musicians, authors, artists and actors worldwide have expressed alarm about their work being used to train generative AI tools that then produce comparable material based upon it.

"We ought to be clear, when we are speaking about data here, we really suggest human creators' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI firms to respect developers' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is images. It's works of art. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to find out how to do something and then do more like that."

In 2023 a song including AI-generated voices of Canadian singers Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social networks before being pulled from streaming platforms because it was not their work and they had not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's creator trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were phony, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not think the usage of generative AI for innovative functions should be banned, however I do think that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without authorization need to be banned," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be really powerful but let's build it fairly and relatively."

OpenAI says Chinese rivals utilizing its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

China's DeepSeek AI shakes industry and dents America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - including the BBC - have actually picked to obstruct AI developers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have actually to team up - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for example.

The UK government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would permit AI developers to use creators' content on the internet to assist establish their designs, unless the rights holders opt out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

He mentions that AI can make advances in areas like defence, health care and logistics without trawling the work of authors, journalists and artists.

"All of these things work without going and altering copyright law and messing up the incomes of the nation's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, is likewise highly versus eliminating copyright law for AI.

"Creative industries are wealth developers, 2.4 million jobs and an entire lot of joy," says the Baroness, who is also an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The government is weakening among its best carrying out markets on the unclear pledge of development."

A government spokesperson stated: "No relocation will be made till we are absolutely confident we have a practical strategy that delivers each of our objectives: increased control for ideal holders to help them accredit their material, access to premium material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more transparency for right holders from AI developers."

Under the UK government's brand-new AI strategy, a national data library containing public information from a vast array of sources will likewise be provided to AI researchers.

In the US the future of federal rules to manage AI is now up in the air following President Trump's go back to the presidency.

In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that intended to increase the security of AI with, to name a few things, companies in the sector needed to share details of the functions of their systems with the US government before they are launched.

But this has actually now been rescinded by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do rather, but he is stated to desire the AI sector to face less policy.

This comes as a variety of suits versus AI firms, and forum.pinoo.com.tr particularly versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been taken out by everyone from the New york city Times to authors, music labels, and even a comic.

They claim that the AI companies broke the law when they took their material from the web without their consent, and used it to train their systems.

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "fair usage" and are therefore exempt. There are a variety of factors which can make up fair usage - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing analysis over how it gathers training information and whether it ought to be paying for it.

If this wasn't all sufficient to contemplate, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek has actually shaken the sector over the past week. It became one of the most downloaded totally free app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek claims that it developed its technology for a fraction of the rate of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's existing supremacy of the sector.

When it comes to me and a profession as an author, I think that at the moment, if I really want a "bestseller" I'll still have to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the present weak point in generative AI tools for larger tasks. It has plenty of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be quite hard to check out in parts due to the fact that it's so verbose.

But given how rapidly the tech is developing, I'm not exactly sure how long I can remain confident that my substantially slower human writing and editing abilities, are better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest advancements in worldwide technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents all over the world.

Outside the UK? Register here.