For Christmas I got an intriguing gift from a good friend - my really own "best-selling" book.
"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (great title) bears my name and my image on its cover, and it has radiant reviews.
Yet it was totally written by AI, with a couple of simple triggers about me supplied by my pal Janet.
It's an intriguing read, and uproarious in parts. But it likewise meanders rather a lot, and is someplace between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.
It simulates my chatty style of writing, but it's likewise a bit recurring, and very verbose. It may have gone beyond Janet's triggers in collating information about me.
Several sentences begin "as a leading innovation journalist ..." - cringe - which could have been scraped from an online bio.
There's also a strange, repeated hallucination in the type of my cat (I have no pets). And there's a metaphor on practically every page - some more random than others.
There are dozens of business 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 sold around 150,000 personalised books, generally in the US, considering that rotating from compiling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.
A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller costs ₤ 26. The company utilizes its own AI tools to generate them, based upon an open source large language design.
I'm not asking you to purchase my book. Actually you can't - only Janet, who developed it, can order any additional copies.
There is presently no barrier to anybody developing one in anybody's name, including stars - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is fictional, produced by AI, and developed "solely to bring humour and joy".
Legally, passfun.awardspace.us the copyright belongs to the company, but Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is planned as a "personalised gag present", and the books do not get sold even more.
He intends to widen his range, generating various categories such as sci-fi, and perhaps offering an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted kind of consumer AI - selling AI-generated items to human clients.
It's also a bit frightening if, like me, you write for a living. Not least since 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 actors worldwide have expressed 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 talking about information here, we in fact imply human creators' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, trade-britanica.trade founder of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI firms to regard developers' rights.
"This is books, this is 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 featuring AI-generated voices of Canadian singers Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social media before being pulled from streaming platforms due to the fact that 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 although the artists were phony, it was still extremely popular.
"I do not think making use of generative AI for innovative purposes ought to be prohibited, but I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without authorization need to be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be really effective however let's develop it morally and fairly."
OpenAI says Chinese competitors 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 - consisting of the BBC - have selected to block AI developers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have actually decided to collaborate - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for instance.
The UK federal government is considering an overhaul of the law that would permit AI designers to use creators' material on the internet to help develop their designs, unless the rights holders decide out.
Ed Newton Rex explains this as "insanity".
He points out that AI can make advances in locations 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 ruining the livelihoods of the country's creatives," he argues.
Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in the House of Lords, is also strongly against eliminating copyright law for AI.
"Creative markets are wealth developers, 2.4 million jobs and a whole lot of pleasure," 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 performing industries on the vague guarantee of development."
A federal government representative said: "No relocation will be made until we are definitely confident we have a useful plan that delivers each of our goals: increased control for right holders to help them certify their content, access to high-quality product to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more openness for ideal holders from AI developers."
Under the UK government's new AI plan, a nationwide information library containing public data from a large range of sources will also be provided 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 boost the security of AI with, wiki.die-karte-bitte.de to name a few things, companies in the sector required to share details of the workings of their systems with the US federal government before they are released.
But this has actually now been rescinded by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do instead, but he is said to desire the AI sector to face less policy.
This comes as a number of lawsuits versus AI companies, and particularly against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been taken out by everybody from the New york city Times to authors, music labels, and even a comic.
They claim that the AI companies broke the law when they took their material from the internet without their consent, and utilized it to train their systems.
The AI business argue that their actions fall under "fair use" and are therefore exempt. There are a number of aspects which can make up reasonable usage - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it gathers training information and whether it must be paying for it.
If this wasn't all enough to contemplate, AI firm DeepSeek has actually shaken the sector over the past week. It ended up being the many downloaded complimentary app on Apple's US App Store.
DeepSeek declares that it developed its technology for a fraction of the rate of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security concerns in the US, and threatens American's current supremacy of the sector.
When it comes to me and a career as an author, hikvisiondb.webcam I believe that at the moment, if I truly desire a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weak point in generative AI tools for bigger tasks. It has plenty of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be quite hard to read in parts due to the fact that it's so verbose.
But provided how rapidly the tech is evolving, I'm not sure how long I can remain confident that my substantially slower human writing and editing skills, are better.
Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the most significant developments in global innovation, with analysis from BBC correspondents all over the world.
Outside the UK? Register here.
1
How an AI-written Book Shows why the Tech 'Horrifies' Creatives
Alba Glaser edited this page 2025-02-04 11:10:37 +01:00