gigieventplanning

For Christmas I got an intriguing gift from a buddy - my very own "best-selling" book.

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

Yet it was completely written by AI, with a couple of basic 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 in between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It imitates my chatty design of composing, however it's likewise a bit recurring, and very verbose. It may have gone beyond Janet's prompts in collating data about me.

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

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

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

When I called the primary executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had actually offered 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 company uses its own AI tools to generate them, based on 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 purchase any further copies.

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

Legally, the copyright comes from the firm, but Mr Mashiach worries that the product is intended as a "personalised gag gift", and the books do not get sold even more.

He wishes to broaden his variety, generating different categories such as sci-fi, and possibly using an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted kind of customer AI - offering AI -generated items to human clients.

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

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

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

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

In 2023 a song including AI-generated voices of Canadian singers Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social media before being pulled from streaming platforms since it was not their work and they had actually not consented to 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 wildly popular.

"I do not think making use of generative AI for innovative functions need to be prohibited, however I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without authorization must be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be really powerful however let's develop 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 selected to block AI designers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have chosen to team up - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for instance.

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

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

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

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

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

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

"The government is undermining among its best performing industries on the vague pledge of development."

A federal government representative stated: "No relocation will be made till we are definitely positive we have a practical strategy that provides each of our goals: increased control for best holders to assist them certify their content, access to high-quality product to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more transparency for ideal holders from AI developers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI strategy, a national data library consisting of public information from a wide variety of sources will also be offered to AI researchers.

In the US the future of federal guidelines to manage 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 improve the security of AI with, amongst other things, companies in the sector needed to share information of the functions of their systems with the US government before they are launched.

But this has now been reversed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do rather, but he is stated to want the AI sector to face less guideline.

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

They declare that the AI firms broke the law when they took their content from the internet without their approval, and used it to train their systems.

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "fair use" and are for that reason exempt. There are a number of elements which can constitute fair use - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it gathers training information and whether it should be paying for it.

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

DeepSeek claims that it developed its innovation for a portion of the cost of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's current supremacy of the sector.

As for me and a career as an author, I believe that at the moment, if I truly desire a "bestseller" I'll still have to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weak point in generative AI tools for larger tasks. It is full of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be rather tough to check out in parts because it's so verbose.

But given how rapidly the tech is evolving, I'm unsure for how long I can stay confident that my considerably slower human writing and modifying abilities, are much better.

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

Outside the UK? Sign up here.