For Christmas I got a fascinating gift from a friend - my extremely own "best-selling" book.
"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (terrific title) bears my name and my photo on its cover, and it has glowing reviews.
Yet it was entirely composed by AI, with a couple of easy prompts about me provided by my buddy Janet.
It's a fascinating read, and uproarious in parts. But it also meanders quite a lot, and is somewhere in between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.
It simulates my chatty design of writing, however it's likewise a bit repeated, and very verbose. It may have exceeded Janet's prompts in collating information about me.
Several sentences begin "as a leading technology reporter ..." - cringe - which might have been scraped from an online bio.
There's likewise a mysterious, repeated hallucination in the form of my cat (I have no family pets). And there's a metaphor on almost every page - some more random than others.
There are lots of business online offering AI-book composing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.
When I contacted the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had offered around 150,000 personalised books, mainly in the US, photorum.eclat-mauve.fr since pivoting from putting together AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.
A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller expenses ₤ 26. The company utilizes its own AI tools to generate them, based on an open source large language model.
I'm not asking you to purchase my book. Actually you can't - just Janet, who created it, can purchase any more copies.
There is currently no barrier to anybody producing one in anyone's name, including celebrities - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around violent material. Each book contains a printed disclaimer specifying that it is fictional, developed by AI, and designed "exclusively to bring humour and pleasure".
Legally, the copyright belongs to the firm, but Mr Mashiach stresses that the product is planned as a "customised gag gift", and the books do not get offered even more.
He intends to broaden his range, producing different genres such as sci-fi, and possibly providing an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted type of consumer AI - selling AI-generated products to human customers.
It's also a bit frightening if, like me, you write for a living. Not least since it most likely 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 expressed alarm about their work being utilized to train generative AI tools that then produce similar content based upon it.
"We ought to be clear, when we are discussing information here, we in fact suggest human creators' 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 photos. It's masterpieces. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to discover 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 due to the fact that it was not their work and they had not granted it. It didn't stop the track's creator trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And although the artists were fake, it was still hugely popular.
"I do not believe making use of generative AI for innovative purposes must be banned, but I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without authorization should be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be extremely effective but let's construct it fairly and fairly."
OpenAI states 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 chosen to obstruct AI designers from trawling their online material for training purposes. Others have actually chosen to team up - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for setiathome.berkeley.edu instance.
The UK federal government is considering an overhaul of the law that would permit AI designers to use developers' material on the internet to assist establish their designs, unless the rights holders pull out.
Ed Newton Rex describes this as "insanity".
He mentions that AI can make advances in locations like defence, healthcare and logistics without trawling the work of authors, reporters and artists.
"All of these things work without going and altering copyright law and destroying the incomes of the country's creatives," he argues.
Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home 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 delight," states the Baroness, who is likewise an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.
"The federal government is weakening among its best performing markets on the vague guarantee of development."
A federal government representative stated: "No relocation will be made up until we are absolutely positive we have a useful strategy that delivers each of our objectives: increased control for ideal holders to assist them certify their content, access to top 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 plan, a nationwide data library containing public information from a large range of sources will also 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 intended to improve the security of AI with, amongst other things, firms in the sector needed to share details of the operations of their systems with the US government before they are released.
But this has now been rescinded by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do rather, but he is stated to desire the AI sector to face less guideline.
This comes as a variety of suits versus AI firms, and particularly against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have 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 companies argue that their actions fall under "fair use" and are therefore exempt. There are a variety of aspects which can make up reasonable use - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it gathers training data and whether it must be paying for it.
If this wasn't all adequate to ponder, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek has actually shaken the sector over the previous week. It became one of the most downloaded complimentary app on Apple's US App Store.
DeepSeek declares that it established its technology for a fraction of the price of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's existing supremacy of the sector.
As for me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the moment, if I really want a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the present weak point in generative AI tools for bigger projects. It has lots of inaccuracies and hallucinations, and it can be quite challenging to check out in parts because it's so long-winded.
But given how quickly the tech is developing, I'm not exactly sure the length of time I can remain that my substantially slower human writing and modifying abilities, are much better.
Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the most significant advancements in worldwide innovation, with analysis from BBC reporters all over the world.
Outside the UK? Sign up here.
1
How an AI written Book Shows why the Tech 'Terrifies' Creatives
Jacqueline Morton edited this page 3 months ago