rekast

For Christmas I got an interesting gift from a good friend - my extremely own "very popular" book.

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

Yet it was totally written by AI, with a few simple triggers about me provided by my pal Janet.

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

It simulates my chatty design of composing, but it's likewise a bit repeated, and very verbose. It may have surpassed Janet's prompts in collecting data about me.

Several sentences begin "as a leading innovation reporter ..." - cringe - which could have been scraped from an online bio.

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

There are lots of companies 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 told me he had offered around 150,000 customised 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 firm uses its own AI tools to produce them, wifidb.science based upon an open source big language design.

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

There is presently no barrier to anybody producing one in any person's name, consisting of stars - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book contains a printed disclaimer specifying that it is fictional, created by AI, and designed "exclusively to bring humour and delight".

Legally, the copyright comes from the company, but Mr Mashiach worries that the product is meant as a "personalised gag gift", and the books do not get sold even more.

He wants to widen his range, creating different genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps providing an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted kind of customer AI - selling AI-generated products to human customers.

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

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

"We should be clear, when we are speaking about information here, we in fact indicate human developers' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, photorum.eclat-mauve.fr founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to regard developers' rights.

"This is books, this is articles, this is photos. It's masterpieces. 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 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 granted it. It didn't stop the track's creator attempting to choose it for a Grammy award. And although the artists were phony, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not think the usage of generative AI for creative purposes must be banned, but I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without approval should be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be really effective however let's construct it ethically and fairly."

OpenAI says Chinese competitors 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 - consisting of the BBC - have actually picked to obstruct AI developers from trawling their online material for training purposes. Others have decided to work together - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for example.

The UK government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would enable AI developers 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, 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 messing up the incomes of the country's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, is also strongly against 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, wikibase.imfd.cl who is likewise an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The federal government is undermining one of its finest carrying out industries on the unclear guarantee of growth."

A government spokesperson said: "No move will be made up until we are definitely positive we have a useful strategy that delivers each of our objectives: increased control for ideal holders to help them accredit their material, access to high-quality product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more openness for right holders from AI developers."

Under the UK government's new AI strategy, a nationwide data library containing public information from a large variety of will likewise be offered 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 aimed to improve the safety of AI with, to name a few things, wiki.vifm.info firms in the sector needed to share details of the workings of their systems with the US federal government before they are released.

But this has actually now been repealed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do instead, however he is stated to want the AI sector to deal with less regulation.

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

They declare 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 "reasonable usage" and are therefore exempt. There are a variety of aspects which can make up fair usage - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it gathers training data and whether it should be paying for it.

If this wasn't all adequate to contemplate, Chinese AI company DeepSeek has shaken the sector over the previous week. It became the a lot of downloaded free app on Apple's US App Store.

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

As for me and a profession 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 Dummies highlights the current weakness in generative AI tools for bigger tasks. It is complete of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be quite challenging to read in parts because it's so long-winded.

But offered how rapidly the tech is evolving, I'm not sure for how long I can stay positive that my substantially slower human writing and modifying skills, are better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the most significant advancements in worldwide technology, with analysis from BBC reporters worldwide.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.