For Christmas I got a fascinating present from a pal - my extremely own "best-selling" book.
"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (great title) bears my name and my picture on its cover, and it has radiant evaluations.
Yet it was completely written by AI, with a couple of easy prompts about me supplied by my buddy Janet.
It's a fascinating read,  larsaluarna.se and uproarious in parts. But it likewise meanders rather a lot, and is somewhere between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.
It imitates my chatty design of composing, but it's also a bit repeated, and very verbose. It may have exceeded Janet's prompts in collating 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, repetitive hallucination in the kind of my cat (I have no pets). And there's a metaphor on practically 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 called the primary executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had sold around 150,000 personalised books, primarily in the US, since rotating from putting together AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.
A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller costs ₤ 26. The firm uses its own AI tools to create them, based on an open source big language design.
I'm not asking you to purchase my book. Actually you can't - only Janet, who developed it, can purchase any further copies.
There is presently no barrier to anybody developing one in any person's name, consisting of celebrities - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book includes a printed disclaimer stating that it is fictional, produced by AI, and created "entirely to bring humour and happiness".
Legally, the copyright comes from the company, however Mr Mashiach worries that the item is intended as a "personalised gag present", and the books do not get sold even more.
He wishes to expand his variety, producing different genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps providing an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted kind of consumer AI - offering AI-generated goods to human customers.
It's likewise a bit terrifying if, like me, you compose for a living. Not least due to the fact that it probably took less than a minute to create, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound similar to me.
Musicians, authors, artists and actors worldwide have expressed alarm about their work being used to train generative AI tools that then churn out comparable content based upon it.
"We ought to be clear, when we are discussing information here, we actually suggest human developers' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to regard developers' rights.
"This is books, this is articles, this is pictures. It's artworks. 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 featuring 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 granted it. It didn't stop the track's creator attempting to nominate it for a Grammy award. And although the artists were phony, it was still wildly popular.
"I do not believe making use of generative AI for imaginative functions ought to be banned, however I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without authorization must be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be very powerful but let's construct it morally and relatively."
OpenAI says Chinese rivals utilizing its work for their AI apps
DeepSeek:  menwiki.men The Chinese AI app that has the world talking
China's DeepSeek AI shakes industry and damages America's swagger
In the UK some organisations - consisting of the BBC - have actually picked to block AI designers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have decided 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 enable AI designers to utilize developers' material on the internet to help develop their models, unless the rights holders pull out.
Ed Newton Rex explains this as "insanity".
He mentions that AI can make advances in areas like defence, healthcare 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 livelihoods of the nation's creatives," he argues.
Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in the House of Lords, is also highly versus removing copyright law for AI.
"Creative industries are wealth developers, 2.4 million tasks and an entire lot of joy," says the Baroness, who is likewise an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.
"The government is weakening one of its best performing industries on the unclear promise of development."
A federal government representative said: "No move will be made till we are absolutely positive we have a practical plan that delivers each of our objectives: increased control for best holders to assist them accredit their content, access to high-quality product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more transparency for ideal holders from AI developers."
Under the UK government's brand-new AI strategy,  surgiteams.com a national data library consisting of public information from a wide variety of sources will also be made offered to AI researchers.
In the US the future of federal guidelines to control AI is now up in the air following President Trump's go back to the presidency.
In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that aimed to increase the safety of AI with, among other things, firms in the sector needed to share information of the operations of their systems with the US federal government before they are released.
But this has now been reversed by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do rather, but he is said to desire the AI sector to deal with less policy.
This comes as a number of suits against AI companies, and especially against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been gotten by everybody from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.
They declare that the AI firms broke the law when they took their material from the internet without their authorization, 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 constitute reasonable usage - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing analysis over how it gathers training data and whether it must be spending for it.
If this wasn't all adequate to ponder, Chinese AI firm 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 claims that it  its technology for a fraction of the cost of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's present supremacy of the sector.
When it comes to me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the minute, if I truly desire a "bestseller" I'll still have to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weak point in generative AI tools for bigger projects. It has lots of errors and hallucinations, and it can be rather tough to check out in parts since it's so verbose.
But offered how rapidly the tech is evolving, I'm not exactly sure for how long I can stay positive that my considerably slower human writing and editing abilities, are much better.
Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the greatest advancements in international innovation, with analysis from BBC reporters around the globe.
Outside the UK? Sign up here.
					1 
					How an AI-written Book Shows why the Tech 'Terrifies' Creatives
					
				
						
						Cassie Hyder edited this page 2025-02-03 05:10:44 +08:00