jungdadam

For Christmas I received a fascinating gift from a buddy - my really own "very popular" book.

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

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

It's an intriguing read, and very funny 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 style of composing, however it's likewise a bit recurring, and really verbose. It might have exceeded Janet's triggers in collating data about me.

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

There's likewise a mystical, repetitive hallucination in the type of my feline (I have no animals). 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 contacted the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually offered around 150,000 customised books, generally in the US, given that 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 company uses its own AI tools to create them, based on an open source large language design.

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

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

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

He wants to expand king-wifi.win his range, creating different genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps providing an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted form of consumer AI AI -generated products to human consumers.

It's likewise a bit scary if, like me, you write for a living. Not least since it most likely took less than a minute to produce, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound similar to me.

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

"We need to be clear, when we are speaking about information here, we in fact imply human developers' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI firms to regard creators' rights.

"This is books, this is articles, this is photos. It's masterpieces. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to learn how to do something and after that 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 since it was not their work and they had actually not granted it. It didn't stop the track's developer trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And although the artists were fake, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not believe the usage of generative AI for imaginative purposes must be banned, however I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without approval should be banned," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be really powerful but let's develop it fairly and relatively."

OpenAI says Chinese competitors 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 - including the BBC - have picked to block AI developers from trawling their online material for training purposes. Others have actually chosen to collaborate - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for example.

The UK federal government is considering an overhaul of the law that would permit AI developers to use developers' content on the web to help develop their designs, unless the rights holders choose out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "insanity".

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

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

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in the House of Lords, is likewise strongly versus removing copyright law for AI.

"Creative markets are wealth developers, 2.4 million tasks and an entire lot of pleasure," states the Baroness, who is likewise an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The government is undermining one of its finest performing markets on the unclear pledge of development."

A federal government spokesperson said: "No move will be made up until we are definitely confident we have a practical plan that delivers each of our goals: increased control for best holders to help them accredit their content, access to high-quality product to train leading AI models 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 range of sources will likewise be provided to AI scientists.

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

In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that aimed to boost the safety of AI with, to name a few things, companies in the sector required to share details of the workings of their systems with the US federal government before they are released.

But this has now been reversed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do instead, however he is said to want the AI sector to face less policy.

This comes as a variety of lawsuits versus AI firms, and particularly against 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 declare that the AI companies broke the law when they took their content from the web without their consent, 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 elements which can make up reasonable use - it's not a straight-forward definition. 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 sufficient to contemplate, Chinese AI company DeepSeek has shaken the sector over the past week. It became one of the most downloaded complimentary app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek claims that it established its technology for a fraction of the cost of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has 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 want a "bestseller" I'll still need to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the present weakness in generative AI tools for bigger jobs. It has lots of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be quite tough to check out in parts since it's so verbose.

But given how rapidly the tech is progressing, I'm unsure the length of time I can stay positive that my considerably slower human writing and modifying skills, are better.

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

Outside the UK? Sign up here.