bobtailsquid

marthahavens1/bobtailsquid

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

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

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

It's an interesting read, oke.zone and uproarious in parts. But it also meanders rather a lot, and is somewhere between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It imitates my chatty style of writing, but it's likewise a bit recurring, kenpoguy.com and very verbose. It might have gone beyond Janet's triggers in collating data about me.

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

There's likewise a mystical, repetitive hallucination in the kind of my feline (I have no pets). And there's a metaphor on nearly every page - some more random than others.

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

When I called the primary executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had actually sold around 150,000 personalised books, mainly in the US, since rotating from putting together AI -generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller expenses ₤ 26. The company utilizes its own AI tools to create them, based on an open source big language model.

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

There is presently no barrier to anyone producing one in anyone's name, consisting of celebrities - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around violent material. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer specifying that it is fictional, created by AI, experienciacortazar.com.ar and developed "solely to bring humour and happiness".

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

He wants to broaden his variety, creating different categories such as sci-fi, and maybe offering an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted form of customer AI - offering AI -generated items to human customers.

It's likewise a bit frightening if, like me, you write for a living. Not least since it probably took less than a minute to create, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound much like me.

Musicians, authors, artists and actors worldwide have revealed alarm about their work being used to train generative AI tools that then produce similar content based upon it.

"We need to be clear, when we are discussing data here, we actually mean human creators' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to respect creators' rights.

"This is books, this is 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 then do more like that."

In 2023 a song including AI -generated voices of Canadian singers 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 developer trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were phony, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not think the usage of generative AI for innovative functions ought to be prohibited, however I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without approval ought to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be very effective however let's construct it morally and fairly."

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 market and damages America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - including the BBC - have chosen to obstruct AI designers from trawling their online content for training purposes. Others have chosen to team up - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for instance.

The UK government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would permit AI designers to utilize creators' content on the web to assist develop their models, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

He explains that AI can make advances in locations 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 messing up the livelihoods of the country's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in the House of Lords, is also highly against removing copyright law for AI.

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

"The government is undermining one of its best performing industries on the vague promise of growth."

A federal government spokesperson stated: "No relocation will be made till we are definitely positive we have a useful plan that provides each of our objectives: increased control for best holders to help them accredit their content, access to premium material to train leading AI models in the UK, and more transparency for best holders from AI developers."

Under the UK federal government's brand-new AI plan, a nationwide data library containing public information from a vast array of sources will also be offered to AI researchers.

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

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

This comes as a number of lawsuits against AI firms, 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 content from the internet without their approval, 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 variety of factors which can make up reasonable use - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it gathers training data and whether it ought to be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek declares that it established its technology for a fraction of the rate of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's existing supremacy of the sector.

As for me and a career as an author, I think that at the moment, if I truly want a "bestseller" I'll still have to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the present weakness in generative AI tools for larger jobs. It has lots of inaccuracies and hallucinations, and it can be quite hard to read in parts since it's so verbose.

But given how rapidly the tech is developing, I'm unsure the length of time 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 biggest developments in worldwide technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents around the world.

Outside the UK? Register here.