GitLab

For Christmas I received an interesting gift from a pal - my really own "very popular" book.

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (terrific title) bears my name and my photo on its cover, and it has radiant evaluations.

Yet it was completely written by AI, with a few simple prompts about me provided by my friend Janet.

It's an intriguing read, pediascape.science and uproarious in parts. But it likewise meanders quite a lot, and is somewhere between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It simulates my chatty style of writing, however it's also a bit repetitive, and really verbose. It might have exceeded Janet's triggers in collating data about me.

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

There's likewise a mystical, repetitive hallucination in the type of my cat (I have no pets). And there's a metaphor on almost 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 got in touch with the chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually sold around 150,000 personalised books, primarily in the US, given that rotating from assembling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller costs ₤ 26. The company uses its own AI tools to produce them, based on an open source large language design.

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 anybody developing one in anybody's name, consisting of stars - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer stating that it is imaginary, developed by AI, bphomesteading.com and created "entirely to bring humour and happiness".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the company, but Mr Mashiach worries that the item is intended as a "personalised gag present", and the books do not get offered even more.

He intends to broaden his range, creating various categories such as sci-fi, and maybe using an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted kind of customer AI - selling AI-generated goods to human consumers.

It's likewise a bit terrifying if, like me, you write for a living. Not least since it probably took less than a minute to create, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound much like me.

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

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

"This is books, this is posts, this is pictures. 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 vocalists Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social media 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 developer attempting to choose it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were phony, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not think the use of generative AI for innovative purposes ought to be banned, however I do think that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without approval must be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be extremely powerful but let's build it fairly and fairly."

OpenAI states Chinese rivals using 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 selected to block AI developers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have actually decided to work together - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for example.

The UK federal government is considering an overhaul of the law that would enable AI designers to utilize developers' content on the internet to help establish their designs, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "insanity".

He points out that AI can make advances in locations like defence, health care and logistics without trawling the work of authors, reporters and artists.

"All of these things work without going and changing copyright law and destroying the livelihoods of the nation's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, is likewise strongly against removing copyright law for AI.

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

"The federal government is undermining among its best performing industries on the unclear pledge of development."

A government spokesperson said: "No relocation will be made till we are absolutely positive we have a useful strategy that delivers each of our goals: increased control for ideal holders to help them license their content, access to top quality material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more transparency for ideal holders from AI developers."

Under the UK government's brand-new AI strategy, a national data library containing public data from a large range 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 enhance the security of AI with, amongst other things, companies in the sector required to share information of the workings of their systems with the US government before they are released.

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

This comes as a number of claims against AI companies, and particularly against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been gotten by everybody from the New york city Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.

They claim that the AI companies broke the law when they took their material from the web without their approval, 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 number of elements which can constitute reasonable use - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it gathers training data and whether it should be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek declares that it established its innovation for a portion of the cost of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's current supremacy of the sector.

When it comes to me and a career as an author, I believe that at the minute, if I truly desire a "bestseller" I'll still have to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for higgledy-piggledy.xyz Dummies highlights the existing weakness in generative AI tools for valetinowiki.racing larger jobs. It has plenty of errors and hallucinations, and it can be quite challenging to read in parts since it's so verbose.

But provided how rapidly the tech is developing, I'm not sure the length of time I can remain confident that my considerably slower human writing and modifying abilities, are much better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the most significant developments in global technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents worldwide.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.