cinewind

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

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (excellent title) bears my name and my image on its cover, fishtanklive.wiki and it has glowing reviews.

Yet it was entirely composed by AI, with a few simple prompts about me supplied by my friend Janet.

It's a fascinating read, and really funny in parts. But it likewise meanders quite a lot, and is someplace between a self-help book and a stream of .

It mimics my chatty design of writing, but it's likewise a bit repeated, and very verbose. It may have surpassed Janet's prompts in collating information about me.

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

There's also a mystical, repeated hallucination in the kind of my feline (I have no family pets). And there's a metaphor on nearly 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 called the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had offered around 150,000 customised books, mainly in the US, because pivoting from assembling 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 produce them, based upon an open source large language model.

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

There is presently no barrier to anybody developing one in any person's name, consisting of celebs - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book includes a printed disclaimer stating that it is imaginary, created by AI, and designed "entirely to bring humour and pleasure".

Legally, the copyright comes from the firm, but Mr Mashiach worries that the item is planned as a "customised gag gift", and the books do not get offered further.

He hopes to broaden his variety, creating different genres such as sci-fi, and maybe providing an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted kind of customer AI - selling AI-generated goods to human consumers.

It's also a bit terrifying if, like me, you compose for a living. Not least due to the fact that it probably took less than a minute to generate, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound much like me.

Musicians, authors, artists and actors 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 discussing information here, we really mean human developers' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI companies to regard developers' rights.

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

In 2023 a tune featuring AI-generated voices of Canadian vocalists Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social media before being pulled from streaming platforms because it was not their work and they had not granted it. It didn't stop the track's creator trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And despite the fact that the artists were fake, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not believe using generative AI for imaginative purposes need to be prohibited, but I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without consent need to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be really powerful but let's develop it ethically 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 market and damages America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - including the BBC - have actually chosen to block AI developers from trawling their online material for training purposes. Others have actually decided to work together - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for example.

The UK government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would enable AI developers to use creators' content on the web to assist develop their models, unless the rights holders opt out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "insanity".

He explains that AI can make advances in locations like defence, healthcare and logistics without trawling the work of authors, reporters and artists.

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

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, is also strongly versus removing copyright law for AI.

"Creative markets are wealth developers, 2.4 million tasks and a whole lot of pleasure," says the Baroness, who is likewise an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The government is weakening among its finest carrying out markets on the unclear guarantee of development."

A federal government spokesperson said: "No relocation will be made until we are definitely confident we have a practical plan that delivers each of our objectives: increased control for ideal holders to assist them license their content, access to premium material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more transparency for best holders from AI developers."

Under the UK federal government's brand-new AI plan, a national information library containing public data from a vast array of sources will also be provided to AI scientists.

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 enhance the safety of AI with, to name a few things, companies in the sector required to share information of the functions of their systems with the US federal government before they are released.

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

This comes as a variety of suits versus AI firms, and particularly against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been taken out by everyone from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.

They claim 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 variety of elements which can constitute fair 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 enough to ponder, Chinese AI company DeepSeek has actually shaken the sector over the past week. It ended up being the most downloaded totally free app on Apple's US App Store.

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

When it comes to me and a career 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 existing weakness in generative AI tools for larger jobs. It has plenty of errors and hallucinations, and it can be rather hard to read in parts because it's so long-winded.

But given how rapidly the tech is evolving, I'm uncertain the length of time I can stay confident that my significantly slower human writing and modifying abilities, are much better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the greatest advancements in global innovation, with analysis from BBC correspondents around the globe.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.