For Christmas I received an interesting gift from a buddy - my really own "very popular" 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 composed by AI, genbecle.com with a few basic triggers about me provided by my pal Janet.
It's an interesting read, and uproarious in parts. But it likewise meanders rather a lot, and is somewhere in between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.
It simulates my chatty style of composing, but it's also a bit recurring, and extremely verbose. It may have surpassed Janet's prompts in collating data about me.
Several sentences begin "as a leading technology journalist ..." - cringe - which might have been scraped from an online bio.
There's also a mystical, repeated 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 dozens of companies online offering AI-book composing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.
When I got in touch with the president Adir Mashiach, astroberry.io based in Israel, he informed me he had sold around 150,000 customised books, mainly in the US, because 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 create them, based upon an open source large language design.
I'm not asking you to buy my book. Actually you can't - just Janet, who produced it, can buy any further copies.
There is presently no barrier to anyone producing one in anybody's name, including stars - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book includes a printed disclaimer stating that it is imaginary, created by AI, and developed "solely to bring humour and happiness".
Legally, the copyright comes from the company, however Mr Mashiach worries that the product is planned as a "customised gag gift", and the books do not get offered even more.
He wishes to widen his variety, generating different genres such as sci-fi, and possibly providing an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted kind of customer AI - offering AI-generated products to human customers.
It's likewise a bit terrifying if, like me, you write for a living. Not least because it probably took less than a minute to generate, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound much like me.
Musicians, authors, artists and stars worldwide have expressed alarm about their work being used to train generative AI tools that then produce similar content based upon it.
"We should be clear, when we are discussing information here, we actually suggest 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 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 tune featuring 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 creator attempting to nominate it for a Grammy award. And although the artists were fake, it was still hugely popular.
"I do not believe making use of generative AI for creative functions ought to be prohibited, but I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without permission ought to be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be really powerful however let's construct it morally 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 damages America's swagger
In the UK some organisations - including the BBC - have selected to obstruct AI developers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have decided to collaborate - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for example.
The UK government is considering an overhaul of the law that would allow AI developers to utilize creators' material on the internet to help develop their designs, unless the rights holders opt 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, reporters and artists.
"All of these things work without going and changing copyright law and destroying the incomes of the country's creatives," he argues.
Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, is likewise strongly against removing copyright law for AI.
"Creative markets are wealth developers, 2.4 million tasks and a lot of pleasure," says the Baroness, who is likewise an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.
"The federal government is undermining one of its finest performing industries on the vague promise of growth."
A government spokesperson said: "No move will be made till we are absolutely positive we have a useful strategy that delivers each of our goals: increased control for ideal holders to assist them accredit their content, access to top quality product to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more transparency for best holders from AI developers."
Under the UK federal government's new AI plan, sosmed.almarifah.id a nationwide data library containing public data from a wide variety of sources will also be made 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 go back to the presidency.
In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that aimed to improve the safety of AI with, amongst other things, firms in the sector needed to share details of the workings of their systems with the US government before they are launched.
But this has now been repealed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do rather, but he is said to desire the AI sector to deal with less policy.
This comes as a variety of suits against AI firms, and particularly against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been secured by everyone from the New York Times to authors, 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 permission, and utilized it to train their systems.
The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "fair usage" and are for that reason exempt. There are a number of elements which can make up reasonable use - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it collects training information and whether it need to be spending for it.
If this wasn't all sufficient to ponder, Chinese AI company DeepSeek has actually shaken the sector over the previous week. It became one of the most downloaded complimentary app on Apple's US App Store.
DeepSeek claims that it developed its technology for a fraction of the rate of the similarity 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 profession as an author, I think that at the moment, if I really desire a "bestseller" I'll still have to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weak point in generative AI tools for bigger projects. It has plenty of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be quite hard to check out in parts since it's so verbose.
But provided how quickly the tech is evolving, I'm unsure the length of time I can remain positive that my significantly slower human writing and editing skills, are much better.
Sign up for our Tech Decoded to follow the most significant advancements in international technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents worldwide.
Outside the UK? Register here.
1
How an AI-written Book Shows why the Tech 'Frightens' Creatives
Barb Phifer edited this page 2025-02-07 04:06:43 +01:00