anthonydmgs

For Christmas I got an interesting present from a pal - my extremely own "best-selling" book.

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (fantastic title) bears my name and my picture on its cover, and it has radiant reviews.

Yet it was totally composed by AI, with a couple of basic triggers about me supplied by my buddy Janet.

It's an interesting read, and really amusing in parts. But it also meanders rather a lot, and is somewhere 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 really verbose. It might have gone beyond Janet's prompts in looking at data about me.

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

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

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

When I got in touch with the president Adir Mashiach, genbecle.com based in Israel, he told me he had offered around 150,000 customised books, primarily in the US, since 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 uses 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 created it, can order any additional copies.

There is currently no barrier to anyone developing one in anyone's name, consisting of stars - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer specifying that it is fictional, produced by AI, and created "solely to bring humour and delight".

Legally, the copyright comes from the company, but Mr Mashiach worries that the product is intended as a "personalised gag present", and the books do not get sold further.

He wishes to widen his range, producing various genres such as sci-fi, and archmageriseswiki.com perhaps offering an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted form of consumer AI - offering AI -generated products to human consumers.

It's also a bit frightening if, like me, you write for a living. Not least since it probably took less than a minute to create, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound similar to me.

Musicians, authors, artists and actors worldwide have expressed alarm about their work being utilized to train generative AI tools that then churn out comparable content based upon it.

"We must be clear, when we are talking about information here, we actually indicate human developers' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI companies to regard developers' rights.

"This is books, this is short articles, this is images. It's artworks. It's records ... The whole point of AI training is to discover 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 networks before being pulled from streaming platforms because it was not their work and they had actually not granted it. It didn't stop the track's developer trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were fake, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not think the usage of generative AI for imaginative functions ought to be prohibited, however I do think that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without consent need to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be extremely effective however let's construct it morally 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 designers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have actually chosen to work together - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for instance.

The UK federal government is considering an overhaul of the law that would enable AI developers to use creators' content on the internet to help establish their models, unless the rights holders decide out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

He explains that AI can make advances in locations 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 destroying the incomes of the country's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, is also highly versus getting rid of copyright law for AI.

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

"The government is undermining among its best performing markets on the unclear guarantee of development."

A government representative stated: "No move will be made until we are absolutely positive we have a useful plan that provides each of our goals: 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 openness for best holders from AI developers."

Under the UK government's new AI strategy, a national data library including public information from a wide range of sources will likewise be offered to AI scientists.

In the US the future of federal guidelines to control AI is now up in the air following President Trump's go back to the presidency.

In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that intended to enhance the security of AI with, to name a few things, firms in the sector needed to share information of the operations of their systems with the US federal government before they are released.

But this has now been reversed by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do instead, but he is said to want the AI sector to deal with less guideline.

This comes as a number of suits versus AI firms, and particularly versus OpenAI, in the US. They have actually been gotten by everybody from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comic.

They claim that the AI companies broke the law when they took their content from the internet without their consent, and used it to train their systems.

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "reasonable usage" and are for that reason exempt. There are a number of factors which can make up fair use - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it collects training data and whether it need to be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek declares that it developed its technology for a portion of the rate of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security concerns 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 minute, if I truly want a "bestseller" I'll still have to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weakness in generative AI tools for bigger tasks. It has plenty of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be quite challenging to check out in parts because it's so long-winded.

But given how rapidly the tech is developing, I'm not exactly sure for how long I can stay confident that my significantly slower human writing and editing skills, are better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the greatest advancements in international technology, with analysis from BBC reporters around the globe.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.