nootheme

adrianmcfall53/nootheme

For Christmas I received a fascinating present from a pal - my extremely own "very popular" book.

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (terrific title) bears my name and engel-und-waisen.de my picture on its cover, and it has radiant evaluations.

Yet it was totally composed by AI, with a few basic prompts about me provided by my buddy Janet.

It's an interesting read, and extremely amusing in parts. But it also meanders rather a lot, and is somewhere between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It simulates my chatty style of writing, but it's likewise a bit repetitive, and extremely verbose. It may have surpassed Janet's prompts in looking at information about me.

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

There's also a strange, repetitive hallucination in the kind of my feline (I have no family pets). And there's a metaphor on nearly 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 got in touch with the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually sold around 150,000 personalised books, generally in the US, considering that rotating from putting together AI -generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller expenses ₤ 26. The firm uses its own AI tools to create them, based upon an open source big language design.

I'm not asking you to buy my book. Actually you can't - only Janet, who developed it, can order any further copies.

There is currently no barrier to anybody producing one in any person's name, including celebs - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer specifying that it is fictional, developed by AI, and developed "solely to bring humour and delight".

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

He wishes to broaden his range, generating various genres such as sci-fi, and possibly using an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted type of consumer AI - offering AI -generated items to human consumers.

It's also a bit frightening if, like me, you compose for a living. Not least due to the fact that it probably took less than a minute to generate, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound similar to me.

Musicians, authors, artists and actors worldwide have revealed alarm about their work being used 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 really imply human developers' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to regard creators' rights.

"This is books, this is articles, this is images. 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 because 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 despite the fact that the artists were fake, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not believe the use of generative AI for innovative purposes ought to be prohibited, but I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without permission ought to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be very effective however let's develop it fairly and fairly."

OpenAI states Chinese rivals utilizing 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 actually selected to block AI designers from trawling their online material for training purposes. Others have decided to work together - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for instance.

The UK federal government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would permit AI developers to use creators' material 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 areas 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 livelihoods of the country's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your house of Lords, is likewise highly against eliminating copyright law for AI.

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

"The government is undermining one of its finest performing industries on the vague guarantee of growth."

A government spokesperson stated: "No move will be made up until we are absolutely positive we have a useful strategy that delivers each of our goals: increased control for ideal holders to assist them accredit their material, access to top quality product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more openness for best holders from AI developers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI plan, a national data library consisting of public information from a large range of sources will also be provided to AI scientists.

In the US the future of federal guidelines 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 enhance the safety of AI with, among other things, companies in the sector needed to share details of the functions of their systems with the US government before they are launched.

But this has now been reversed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do rather, but he is said to want the AI sector to deal with less guideline.

This comes as a number of suits versus AI firms, and particularly against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been secured by everyone from the New york city Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.

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 companies argue that their actions fall under "reasonable use" and are therefore exempt. There are a variety of aspects which can make up - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it gathers training information and whether it should be paying for it.

If this wasn't all enough to consider, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek has shaken the sector over the previous week. It became one of the most downloaded totally free app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek claims that it developed its technology for a fraction of the price of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's existing dominance of the sector.

When it comes to me and a career as an author, I think that at the moment, if I actually desire a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weakness in generative AI tools for larger jobs. It has lots of errors and hallucinations, and it can be rather tough to read in parts since it's so verbose.

But provided how quickly the tech is evolving, I'm not exactly sure how long I can remain confident that my substantially slower human writing and editing skills, are much better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the greatest advancements in international innovation, with analysis from BBC reporters around the world.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.