rackons

For Christmas I received an interesting present 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 glowing reviews.

Yet it was totally written by AI, with a couple of simple prompts about me provided by my buddy Janet.

It's an intriguing read, and uproarious in parts. But it likewise meanders quite a lot, and is somewhere between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It mimics my chatty style of writing, but it's also a bit repeated, and very verbose. It might have exceeded Janet's triggers in collecting data about me.

Several sentences start "as a leading technology reporter ..." - 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 family pets). And there's a metaphor on nearly 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 got in touch with the chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had offered around 150,000 customised 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 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 - just Janet, who produced it, can buy any further copies.

There is presently no barrier to anyone developing one in anybody's name, including celebs - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around violent material. Each book contains a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is imaginary, created by AI, and designed "entirely to bring humour and happiness".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the firm, however Mr Mashiach worries that the product is planned as a "customised gag present", and the books do not get offered further.

He hopes to broaden his variety, creating different genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps offering an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted type of customer AI - offering AI -generated items to human clients.

It's likewise a bit scary if, like me, you write for a living. Not least due to the fact that it probably took less than a minute to produce, 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 produce comparable content based upon it.

"We need to be clear, when we are talking about information here, we in fact mean human creators' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to regard creators' rights.

"This is books, this is articles, this is photos. It's artworks. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to learn how to do something and after that do more like that."

In 2023 a song featuring AI -generated voices of Canadian vocalists Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social networks 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 although the artists were phony, it was still hugely popular.

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

OpenAI states Chinese competitors using its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: The AI app that has the world talking

China's DeepSeek AI shakes industry and damages America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - consisting of the BBC - have actually picked to obstruct AI designers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have actually decided to collaborate - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for instance.

The UK federal government is considering an overhaul of the law that would permit AI developers to use creators' content on the web to help establish their designs, unless the rights holders pull 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 changing copyright law and messing up the incomes of the country's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, utahsyardsale.com a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, is likewise strongly against getting rid of copyright law for AI.

"Creative industries are wealth developers, 2.4 million jobs and a 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 carrying out markets on the unclear promise of development."

A federal government spokesperson said: "No move will be made till we are absolutely confident we have a useful strategy that provides each of our objectives: increased control for right holders to help them license their material, access to top quality product to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more transparency for right holders from AI developers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI strategy, a national data library including public data from a wide variety of sources will likewise be provided 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 aimed to enhance the safety 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 reversed by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do rather, however he is stated to desire the AI sector to face less regulation.

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

They claim that the AI companies broke the law when they took their material from the web without their authorization, and used it to train their systems.

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "reasonable usage" and are therefore exempt. There are a number of elements which can make up 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 should be spending for it.

If this wasn't all enough to contemplate, Chinese AI company DeepSeek has actually shaken the sector over the past week. It ended up being one of the most downloaded complimentary app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek claims that it developed its innovation for a portion of the rate of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's present dominance of the sector.

As for me and a career as an author, I think that at the moment, if I really want a "bestseller" I'll still have to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weakness in generative AI tools for bigger projects. It is complete of errors and hallucinations, and it can be quite difficult to read in parts because it's so verbose.

But provided how quickly the tech is progressing, I'm not sure the length of time I can stay confident that my significantly slower human writing and modifying abilities, are better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the most significant advancements in worldwide technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents around the globe.

Outside the UK? Register here.