hcr-20

For Christmas I received an intriguing gift from a friend - my extremely own "best-selling" book.

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

Yet it was completely written by AI, with a few basic prompts about me supplied by my good friend Janet.

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

It imitates my chatty style of composing, however it's likewise a bit repeated, and really verbose. It may have exceeded Janet's triggers in looking at data about me.

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

There's also a mystical, repetitive hallucination in the form of my feline (I have no animals). And there's a metaphor on practically every page - some more random than others.

There are dozens of companies online offering AI -book composing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I called the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually offered around 150,000 personalised books, mainly in the US, considering that pivoting from assembling 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 generate them, based on an open source large language model.

I'm not asking you to buy my book. Actually you can't - only Janet, who produced it, can purchase any more copies.

There is presently no barrier to anyone producing one in any person's name, including celebs - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book includes a printed disclaimer specifying that it is imaginary, produced by AI, and bphomesteading.com created "exclusively to bring humour and joy".

Legally, the copyright comes from the company, however Mr Mashiach worries that the product is meant as a "personalised gag gift", and the books do not get sold further.

He wants to broaden his variety, creating different categories such as sci-fi, and possibly using an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted kind of consumer AI - selling AI -generated items to human consumers.

It's likewise a bit terrifying if, like me, you write for grandtribunal.org a living. Not least because 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 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 discussing information here, we in fact indicate human creators' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI companies to regard developers' rights.

"This is books, this is short articles, this is pictures. It's works of art. 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 including 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 not granted it. It didn't stop the track's creator trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And despite the fact that the artists were fake, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not believe the use of generative AI for innovative functions should be banned, but I do think that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without authorization must be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be extremely effective however let's construct it fairly and relatively."

OpenAI states Chinese rivals using 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 - including the BBC - have chosen to block AI designers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have actually chosen to collaborate - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for instance.

The UK federal government is considering an of the law that would allow AI developers to utilize creators' material on the internet to help develop their models, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

He explains 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 altering copyright law and destroying the livelihoods of the nation's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in the House of Lords, is also strongly versus eliminating copyright law for AI.

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

"The government is undermining among its finest carrying out industries on the unclear pledge of development."

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

Under the UK government's brand-new AI strategy, a nationwide data library including public data from a wide variety of sources will likewise be made readily available to AI scientists.

In the US the future of federal guidelines 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 aimed to improve the security of AI with, to name a few things, companies in the sector required to share information of the functions of their systems with the US government before they are released.

But this has now been rescinded by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do instead, however he is stated to desire the AI sector to deal with less policy.

This comes as a variety of claims versus AI companies, and particularly against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been gotten by everybody from the New York Times to authors, utahsyardsale.com music labels, and even a comedian.

They declare that the AI firms 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 elements which can make up fair use - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing analysis over how it gathers training information and whether it need to be spending for it.

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

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

As for me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the minute, if I really want a "bestseller" I'll still have to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weakness in generative AI tools for larger jobs. It is complete of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be rather difficult to check out in parts since it's so long-winded.

But given how quickly the tech is evolving, I'm unsure how long I can stay confident that my considerably slower human writing and editing abilities, are better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest developments in international technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents worldwide.

Outside the UK? Register here.