deltamobile

For Christmas I got an interesting gift from a pal - my extremely own "very popular" book.

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

Yet it was completely written by AI, with a couple of basic triggers about me supplied by my good friend Janet.

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

It mimics my chatty design of writing, but it's also a bit repeated, and extremely verbose. It might have gone beyond Janet's triggers in collating data about me.

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

There's likewise a mysterious, repetitive hallucination in the kind of my cat (I have no animals). And there's a metaphor on almost every page - some more random than others.

There are lots of companies online offering AI-book writing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I got in touch with the primary executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had offered around 150,000 customised books, generally in the US, since pivoting from compiling AI -generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller costs ₤ 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 purchase my book. Actually you can't - just Janet, who produced it, can purchase any further copies.

There is presently no barrier to anyone producing one in anybody's name, including stars - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book includes a printed disclaimer specifying that it is imaginary, developed by AI, and designed "exclusively to bring humour and happiness".

Legally, the copyright comes from the firm, however Mr Mashiach stresses that the product is meant as a "customised gag present", and the books do not get sold further.

He wants to widen his range, generating different categories such as sci-fi, and possibly using an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted type of customer AI - offering AI-generated goods to human clients.

It's also a bit scary if, like me, you write for a living. Not least due to the fact that it most likely took less than a minute to generate, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound much like me.

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

"We ought to be clear, when we are talking about data here, we in fact imply human developers' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI companies to respect creators' rights.

"This is books, this is short articles, this is pictures. It's artworks. It's records ... The whole point of AI training is to find out how to do something and after that do more like that."

In 2023 a song including AI -generated voices of Canadian singers Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social networks before being pulled from streaming platforms because it was not their work and they had not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's developer attempting to choose it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were fake, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not believe using generative AI for innovative functions need to be banned, however I do think that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without approval must be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be really powerful however let's build it ethically and fairly."

OpenAI says Chinese rivals using its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

China's DeepSeek AI shakes market and dents America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - consisting of the BBC - have picked to block AI designers from trawling their online material for training purposes. Others have chosen to team up - 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 enable AI designers to utilize developers' content on the web to assist develop their models, unless the rights holders choose out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

He explains that AI can make advances in areas like defence, health care and logistics without trawling the work of authors, reporters and artists.

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

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

"Creative industries are wealth developers, 2.4 million jobs and a lot of joy," says the Baroness, who is likewise a consultant to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The federal government is undermining among its best performing industries on the vague pledge of development."

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

Under the UK government's new AI strategy, a national information library containing public data from a large variety of sources will likewise be offered to AI researchers.

In the US the future of federal guidelines 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 enhance the safety of AI with, amongst other things, companies in the sector required to share information of the operations of their systems with the US government before they are launched.

But this has actually now been repealed by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do rather, but he is stated to desire the AI sector to deal with less regulation.

This comes as a number of claims versus AI firms, and especially 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 claim that the AI firms broke the law when they took their content from the web without their authorization, and utilized it to train their systems.

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "fair usage" and are therefore exempt. There are a number of factors which can constitute reasonable usage - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing analysis over how it collects training information and whether it must be spending for it.

If this wasn't all adequate to ponder, Chinese AI company DeepSeek has actually shaken the sector over the previous week. It became the most downloaded free app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek claims that it established its innovation for a fraction of the cost of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has raised security concerns in the US, and threatens American's current dominance of the sector.

As for me and a profession as an author, I think that at the minute, if I really desire 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 tasks. It is complete of errors and hallucinations, and wolvesbaneuo.com it can be quite difficult to check out in parts since it's so verbose.

But offered how quickly the tech is progressing, I'm not exactly sure the length of time I can remain confident that my substantially slower human writing and editing skills, are better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the greatest developments in worldwide technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents all over the world.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.