sunandsandevents

For Christmas I got a fascinating gift from a friend - my really own "best-selling" book.

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (terrific title) bears my name and yewiki.org my photo on its cover, and it has glowing evaluations.

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

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

It simulates my chatty design of composing, but it's also a bit repetitive, and really verbose. It might have surpassed Janet's prompts in looking at data about me.

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

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

There are dozens of business online offering AI -book writing . My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I contacted the chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had sold around 150,000 customised books, mainly in the US, given that rotating from putting together AI -generated travel guides in June 2024.

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

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

There is presently no barrier to anybody creating one in any person's name, including stars - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer stating that it is imaginary, created by AI, and designed "entirely to bring humour and joy".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the company, but Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is meant as a "personalised gag present", and the books do not get offered further.

He intends to widen his range, producing various categories such as sci-fi, and perhaps providing an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted kind of consumer AI - selling AI -generated items to human customers.

It's likewise a bit frightening if, like me, you compose for a living. Not least due to the fact that it probably took less than a minute to create, geohashing.site and it does, definitely in some parts, sound similar to me.

Musicians, authors, artists and stars worldwide have actually revealed alarm about their work being used to train generative AI tools that then churn out similar material based upon it.

"We must be clear, when we are talking about information here, we actually mean human developers' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI firms to respect developers' rights.

"This is books, this is articles, this is images. It's artworks. 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 including AI -generated voices of Canadian vocalists 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 attempting to choose it for a Grammy award. And although the artists were phony, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not think using generative AI for imaginative functions ought to be prohibited, but I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without permission must be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be really effective however let's construct it fairly and fairly."

OpenAI states Chinese competitors utilizing 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 actually picked to block AI developers from trawling their online material for training purposes. Others have chosen to team up - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for example.

The UK federal government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would permit AI developers to utilize developers' material on the internet to assist establish their models, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "insanity".

He explains 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 destroying the incomes of the nation's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your house of Lords, is likewise strongly versus getting rid of copyright law for AI.

"Creative markets are wealth developers, 2.4 million jobs and a great deal of joy," 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 finest carrying out markets on the unclear promise of growth."

A government spokesperson said: "No relocation will be made up until we are definitely positive we have a useful strategy that delivers each of our goals: increased control for ideal holders to assist them accredit their material, access to high-quality material 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 data library containing public data from a large range of sources will likewise be provided to AI researchers.

In the US the future of federal guidelines to control 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, firms in the sector needed to share details of the functions of their systems with the US federal government before they are launched.

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

This comes as a number of suits versus AI companies, and particularly against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been secured by everybody from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and oke.zone even a comic.

They declare that the AI firms broke the law when they took their material from the web without their authorization, 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 number of factors which can constitute reasonable use - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it gathers training data and whether it ought to be spending for it.

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

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

When it comes to me and a career as an author, I believe that at the moment, if I really want a "bestseller" I'll still need to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weak point in generative AI tools for larger jobs. It is full of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be rather tough to read in parts since it's so long-winded.

But given how quickly the tech is progressing, I'm uncertain how long I can remain positive that my substantially slower human writing and editing skills, are much better.

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

Outside the UK? Register here.