For Christmas I got an interesting gift from a buddy - my extremely own "best-selling" book.
"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (excellent title) bears my name and my picture on its cover, and it has glowing reviews.
Yet it was totally composed by AI, with a few basic triggers about me provided by my friend Janet.
It's an interesting read, and uproarious in parts. But it also 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, however it's likewise a bit recurring, and extremely verbose. It might have gone beyond Janet's prompts in collecting information about me.
Several sentences start "as a leading innovation journalist ..." - cringe - which might have been scraped from an online bio.
There's also a mystical, higgledy-piggledy.xyz repeated hallucination in the form of my feline (I have no family pets). And there's a metaphor on almost 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 contacted the primary executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually sold around 150,000 customised books, mainly 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 utilizes its own AI tools to generate them, based on an open source big language model.
I'm not asking you to buy my book. Actually you can't - just Janet, who created it, can buy any additional copies.
There is presently no barrier to anyone producing one in any person's name, consisting of celebs - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around violent content. Each book includes a printed disclaimer specifying that it is fictional, produced by AI, and designed "solely to bring humour and pleasure".
Legally, the copyright belongs to the firm, but Mr Mashiach worries that the item is planned as a "personalised gag gift", and the books do not get offered further.
He hopes to expand his range, creating different categories such as sci-fi, and perhaps using an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted kind of customer AI - offering AI-generated items to human clients.
It's also a bit terrifying if, like me, you write for a living. Not least due to the fact that it probably took less than a minute to create, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound much like me.
Musicians, authors, artists and stars worldwide have actually revealed alarm about their work being used to train generative AI tools that then produce comparable material based upon it.
"We need to be clear, when we are talking about data here, we in fact indicate human creators' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which for AI companies to respect creators' rights.
"This is books, this is short 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 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 media 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 creator attempting to choose it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were fake, it was still hugely popular.
"I do not believe using generative AI for imaginative purposes need to be prohibited, but I do think that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without authorization need to be banned," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be extremely effective however let's develop it morally 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 damages America's swagger
In the UK some organisations - including the BBC - have selected to block AI designers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have chosen to work together - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for example.
The UK federal government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would allow AI developers to utilize creators' material on the web to help establish 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, journalists and artists.
"All of these things work without going and changing copyright law and messing up the incomes of the nation's creatives," he argues.
Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in the House of Lords, is likewise strongly against removing copyright law for AI.
"Creative markets are wealth creators, 2.4 million jobs and a great deal of delight," states the Baroness, who is likewise a consultant to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.
"The federal government is weakening one of its best carrying out industries on the unclear guarantee of growth."
A federal government representative said: "No relocation will be made until we are definitely positive we have a useful strategy that provides each of our goals: 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 transparency for right holders from AI developers."
Under the UK federal government's brand-new AI plan, a nationwide data library including public data from a vast array of sources will also be provided to AI scientists.
In the US the future of federal rules to control 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 safety of AI with, amongst other things, companies in the sector needed to share information of the workings of their systems with the US federal government before they are released.
But this has actually now been reversed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do instead, but he is said to desire the AI sector to deal with less regulation.
This comes as a variety of lawsuits against AI companies, and particularly against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been gotten by everybody from the New york city 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 internet without their approval, and utilized it to train their systems.
The AI business argue that their actions fall under "reasonable usage" and are for that reason exempt. There are a variety of elements which can make up reasonable 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 should be paying for it.
If this wasn't all adequate to consider, Chinese AI company 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 claims that it established its innovation for a portion of the price of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has 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 minute, if I truly want a "bestseller" I'll still have to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the present weakness in generative AI tools for larger projects. It is complete of inaccuracies and hallucinations, and it can be quite difficult to read in parts because it's so verbose.
But provided how quickly the tech is evolving, I'm not sure for how long I can remain positive that my considerably slower human writing and editing skills, are much better.
Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the greatest developments in global technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents worldwide.
Outside the UK? Sign up here.
1
How an AI written Book Shows why the Tech 'Horrifies' Creatives
Abbie Lillico edited this page 2 months ago