logictive

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

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

Yet it was entirely composed by AI, with a couple of basic triggers about me supplied by my friend Janet.

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

It simulates my chatty style of writing, but it's also a bit repeated, and really verbose. It might have surpassed Janet's triggers in collating information about me.

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

There's also a mysterious, repeated hallucination in the kind of my cat (I have no animals). 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 called the chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had sold around 150,000 personalised books, mainly in the US, considering that rotating from assembling AI -generated travel guides in June 2024.

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

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

There is presently no barrier to anyone producing one in any person's name, including stars - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book contains a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is fictional, created by AI, and created "solely to bring humour and happiness".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the company, but Mr Mashiach stresses that the product is planned as a "personalised gag present", and the books do not get offered further.

He intends to broaden his range, creating various categories such as sci-fi, and possibly offering an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted kind of customer AI - selling AI -generated products to human customers.

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

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

"We must be clear, when we are talking about data here, we in fact mean human creators' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI companies to regard creators' rights.

"This is books, this is articles, this is photos. It's works of art. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to discover how to do something and after that do more like that."

In 2023 a tune 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 actually not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's creator trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were fake, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not think using generative AI for creative purposes ought to be prohibited, but I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without approval should be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be very powerful but let's construct it morally and fairly."

OpenAI says Chinese rivals using its work for addsub.wiki their AI apps

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

China's DeepSeek AI shakes industry and damages America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - including the BBC - have picked to obstruct AI designers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have actually decided to team up - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for example.

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

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

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 changing copyright law and destroying the incomes of the nation's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, is likewise highly against getting rid of copyright law for AI.

"Creative markets are wealth creators, 2.4 million tasks 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 weakening among its best performing industries on the unclear guarantee of development."

A federal government representative stated: "No move will be made up until we are absolutely confident we have a practical strategy that delivers each of our objectives: increased control for right holders to help them certify their material, access to high-quality material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more openness for ideal holders from AI developers."

Under the UK federal government's brand-new AI plan, a nationwide data library including public information from a broad variety of sources will also be provided to AI researchers.

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 intended to boost the security of AI with, to name a few things, firms in the sector needed to share details of the workings of their systems with the US government before they are released.

But this has actually now been rescinded by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do rather, however he is stated to want the AI sector to face less guideline.

This comes as a variety of lawsuits against AI firms, and especially against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been taken out by everybody from the New York Times to authors, music labels, wiki.vifm.info and even a comic.

They declare that the AI companies broke the law when they took their material from the internet without their permission, and utilized it to train their systems.

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "reasonable use" and are for that reason exempt. There are a variety of elements which can constitute fair use - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it collects training data and whether it must be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek declares that it established its innovation for a fraction of the price of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's present dominance of the sector.

As for me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the moment, if I really desire a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weak point in generative AI tools for larger projects. It has plenty of and hallucinations, and it can be quite hard to check out in parts since it's so long-winded.

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

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the greatest developments in worldwide technology, with analysis from BBC reporters around the world.

Outside the UK? Register here.