For Christmas I received an intriguing gift from a pal - my really own "very popular" book.
"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (terrific title) bears my name and my photo on its cover, and it has radiant evaluations.
Yet it was entirely written by AI, with a couple of simple triggers about me provided by my buddy Janet.
It's an interesting read, and extremely funny in parts. But it also meanders quite a lot, and is someplace between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.
It simulates my chatty design of composing, but it's likewise a bit repetitive, and really verbose. It may have exceeded Janet's triggers in collecting 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 mysterious, repeated hallucination in the kind 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 contacted the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had sold 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 company uses its own AI tools to generate 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 developed it, can order any additional copies.
There is currently no barrier to anyone creating one in any person's name, including celebrities - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book includes a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is fictional, developed by AI, and designed "solely to bring humour and joy".
Legally, the copyright comes from the firm, however Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is planned as a "customised gag present", and the books do not get sold even more.
He intends to broaden his range, producing various genres such as sci-fi, and possibly providing an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted form of customer AI - selling AI-generated products to human clients.
It's likewise a bit scary if, bytes-the-dust.com like me, you compose for a living. Not least since it probably took less than a minute to create, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound similar to me.
Musicians, authors, artists and actors worldwide have expressed alarm about their work being used to train generative AI tools that then churn out similar material based upon it.
"We ought to be clear, when we are speaking about information here, we in fact indicate human creators' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI companies to respect creators' rights.
"This is books, this is posts, this is photos. It's artworks. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to discover how to do something and then do more like that."
In 2023 a tune 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 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 phony, it was still extremely popular.
"I do not believe making use of generative AI for imaginative purposes must be prohibited, however I do think that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without consent must be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be very effective but let's develop it fairly and fairly."
OpenAI says 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 dents America's swagger
In the UK some organisations - including the BBC - have picked to block AI developers from trawling their online material for training purposes. Others have actually decided to collaborate - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for instance.
The UK federal government is considering an overhaul of the law that would allow AI developers to content on the web to help develop their designs, unless the rights holders opt out.
Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".
He mentions that AI can make advances in areas like defence, healthcare and logistics without trawling the work of authors, journalists and artists.
"All of these things work without going and altering copyright law and ruining the livelihoods of the nation's creatives," he argues.
Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, is likewise strongly against eliminating copyright law for AI.
"Creative industries are wealth developers, 2.4 million tasks and a whole lot of delight," states the Baroness, who is also an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.
"The government is weakening one of its finest performing industries on the unclear promise of growth."
A government representative said: "No relocation will be made up until we are definitely confident we have a useful plan that provides each of our goals: increased control for best holders to help them accredit their content, access to premium product to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more openness for best holders from AI developers."
Under the UK government's brand-new AI plan, a nationwide data library including public information from a vast array of sources will also be offered to AI scientists.
In the US the future of federal rules 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 increase the security of AI with, among other things, companies in the sector needed to share information of the operations of their systems with the US federal government before they are released.
But this has now been reversed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do instead, but he is said to want the AI sector to deal with less policy.
This comes as a number of suits against AI companies, and especially against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been gotten by everyone from the New york city Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.
They declare that the AI firms broke the law when they took their material from the web without their permission, and utilized it to train their systems.
The AI business argue that their actions fall under "reasonable usage" and are therefore exempt. There are a number of aspects which can constitute reasonable use - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it gathers training information and whether it ought to be spending for it.
If this wasn't all sufficient to contemplate, Chinese AI company DeepSeek has actually shaken the sector over the previous week. It became the many downloaded totally free app on Apple's US App Store.
DeepSeek declares that it developed its technology for a fraction of the price of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security concerns in the US, and threatens American's existing dominance of the sector.
As for me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the minute, if I really desire 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 full of inaccuracies and hallucinations, and it can be rather difficult to check out in parts because it's so verbose.
But provided how quickly the tech is developing, I'm uncertain how long I can remain positive that my considerably slower human writing and modifying skills, are much better.
Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the most significant developments in global technology, with analysis from BBC reporters around the globe.
Outside the UK? Register here.
1
How an AI written Book Shows why the Tech 'Horrifies' Creatives
Carson Blaylock edited this page 2 months ago