sdgbindia

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

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

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

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

It simulates my chatty design of writing, however it's also a bit repetitive, and very verbose. It may have surpassed Janet's triggers in collecting data about me.

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

There's also a mysterious, repeated hallucination in the form of my feline (I have no animals). And there's a metaphor on practically every page - some more random than others.

There are dozens of companies online offering AI-book writing 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 sold around 150,000 customised books, generally in the US, considering that pivoting from assembling 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 generate them, based upon an open source big language model.

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

There is currently no barrier to anyone creating one in anyone's name, including stars - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around violent content. Each book includes a printed disclaimer stating that it is imaginary, produced by AI, and developed "entirely to bring humour and happiness".

Legally, the copyright comes from the company, lespoetesbizarres.free.fr however Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is intended as a "personalised gag present", and the books do not get offered further.

He wants to widen his variety, creating various categories such as sci-fi, and possibly offering an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted kind of customer AI - selling AI -generated items to human customers.

It's also a bit scary if, like me, you compose for a living. Not least since it most likely took less than a minute to produce, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound simply like me.

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

"We must be clear, when we are speaking about data here, we actually imply human developers' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to respect 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 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 actually not granted it. It didn't stop the track's creator attempting to nominate it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were phony, it was still .

"I do not believe the usage of generative AI for creative functions need to be banned, however I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without approval need to be banned," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be extremely effective however let's construct it ethically and relatively."

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 industry and dents America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - consisting of the BBC - have picked to block AI developers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have chosen to collaborate - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for instance.

The UK government is considering an overhaul of the law that would enable AI developers to utilize developers' content on the internet to assist develop their models, 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, reporters and artists.

"All of these things work without going and changing copyright law and ruining the livelihoods of the country's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, is likewise highly versus eliminating copyright law for AI.

"Creative industries are wealth developers, 2.4 million jobs and a lot of joy," states the Baroness, who is likewise an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The government is weakening among its best carrying out markets on the unclear pledge of growth."

A government representative stated: "No move will be made till we are definitely confident we have a practical plan that provides each of our objectives: increased control for best holders to help them license their content, access to high-quality material to train leading AI models in the UK, and more openness for right holders from AI designers."

Under the UK government's new AI plan, a national information library containing public information from a wide variety of sources will also 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 intended to improve the safety of AI with, among other things, firms in the sector required to share details of the functions of their systems with the US federal government before they are launched.

But this has now been reversed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do rather, however he is said to want the AI sector to deal with less policy.

This comes as a variety of claims against AI companies, and especially versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been gotten by everyone from the New york city 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 internet without their authorization, and utilized it to train their systems.

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "reasonable use" and wiki.rrtn.org are therefore exempt. There are a number of factors which can constitute reasonable usage - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing analysis over how it collects training information and whether it ought to be spending for it.

If this wasn't all sufficient to contemplate, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek has actually shaken the sector over the previous week. It ended up being the many downloaded free app on Apple's US App Store.

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

As for me and a profession as an author, I believe 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 present weakness in generative AI tools for larger tasks. It has plenty of inaccuracies and hallucinations, and it can be quite difficult to read in parts because it's so long-winded.

But provided how rapidly the tech is progressing, I'm not sure how long I can stay positive that my considerably slower human writing and modifying skills, are better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the most significant developments in global innovation, with analysis from BBC reporters around the globe.

Outside the UK? Register here.