room-7942

For Christmas I got a fascinating gift from a buddy - my very own "best-selling" book.

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

Yet it was totally written by AI, with a few basic triggers about me supplied by my friend Janet.

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

It imitates my chatty style of composing, however it's likewise a bit repeated, and really verbose. It might have surpassed Janet's triggers in collecting data about me.

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

There's likewise a mysterious, repeated hallucination in the type of my cat (I have no animals). And there's a metaphor on almost every page - some more random than others.

There are dozens of companies online offering AI -book writing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I contacted the chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had sold around 150,000 personalised books, generally in the US, because rotating from compiling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller expenses ₤ 26. The firm utilizes its own AI tools to create them, based on an open source large language design.

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

There is currently no barrier to anybody producing one in anyone's name, surgiteams.com including celebrities - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book contains a printed disclaimer specifying that it is fictional, developed by AI, and developed "entirely to bring humour and pleasure".

Legally, the copyright comes from the company, but Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is intended as a "customised gag gift", and the books do not get sold further.

He intends to widen his range, creating different categories such as sci-fi, and maybe providing an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted type of consumer AI - selling AI-generated products to human consumers.

It's likewise a bit scary if, like me, you write for a living. Not least because it probably took less than a minute to generate, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound much like me.

Musicians, authors, artists and actors worldwide have actually revealed alarm about their work being utilized to train generative AI tools that then churn out comparable material based upon it.

"We ought to be clear, when we are discussing data here, we really mean human developers' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to regard developers' rights.

"This is books, this is short articles, this is pictures. It's works of art. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to learn how to do something and then do more like that."

In 2023 a song including AI-generated voices of Canadian vocalists 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 developer attempting to nominate it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were fake, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not think using generative AI for creative functions should be prohibited, however I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without approval need to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be extremely effective however let's develop it ethically and relatively."

OpenAI says Chinese rivals using its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

China's DeepSeek AI shakes market and damages America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - consisting of the BBC - have actually selected to block AI developers from trawling their online material for training purposes. Others have actually chosen to team up - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for example.

The UK government is considering an overhaul of the law that would permit AI developers to use developers' content on the internet to help establish their models, unless the rights holders pull 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, reporters and artists.

"All of these things work without going and altering copyright law and ruining the livelihoods of the country's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your house of Lords, is also highly versus getting rid of copyright law for AI.

"Creative industries are wealth developers, 2.4 million jobs and a great deal of joy," says the Baroness, who is likewise an advisor to the Institute for prazskypantheon.cz Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The federal government is weakening among its finest performing industries on the unclear promise of growth."

A federal government spokesperson stated: "No move will be made up until we are absolutely positive we have a practical plan that provides each of our objectives: increased control for right holders to assist them license their content, access to top quality material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more openness for right holders from AI designers."

Under the UK government's brand-new AI plan, a nationwide information library including public data from a large variety of sources will also be offered to AI researchers.

In the US the future of federal guidelines 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 enhance the security of AI with, amongst other things, firms in the sector required to share details of the operations of their systems with the US federal government before they are launched.

But this has now been rescinded by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do instead, but he is said to desire the AI sector to face less guideline.

This comes as a number of suits versus AI companies, and especially versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been gotten by everyone from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comic.

They claim that the AI companies broke the law when they took their content from the internet without their approval, and utilized it to train their systems.

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "fair use" and are therefore exempt. There are a number of aspects which can make up reasonable use - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it collects training information and whether it should be spending for it.

If this wasn't all adequate to consider, Chinese AI company DeepSeek has shaken the sector over the previous week. It ended up being one of the most downloaded totally free app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek declares that it established its technology for a fraction of the rate of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security concerns in the US, and threatens American's present supremacy of the sector.

When it comes to me and a profession as an author, I think that at the minute, if I actually desire a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weakness in generative AI tools for larger jobs. It has lots of errors and hallucinations, and it can be quite difficult to check out in parts since it's so long-winded.

But given how quickly the tech is progressing, I'm not sure how long I can stay positive that my significantly slower human writing and modifying skills, are better.

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

Outside the UK? Register here.