For Christmas I received an interesting present from a buddy - my extremely own "very popular" book.
"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (terrific title) bears my name and my image on its cover, and it has radiant reviews.
Yet it was entirely composed by AI, with a few easy prompts about me provided by my pal Janet.
It's an interesting read, and really funny in parts. But it also meanders rather a lot, and is somewhere in between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.
It imitates my chatty style of writing, drapia.org but it's also a bit recurring, and really verbose. It might have gone beyond Janet's triggers in looking at data about me.
Several sentences start "as a leading technology journalist ..." - cringe - which could have been scraped from an online bio.
There's likewise a mystical, repetitive hallucination in the kind of my feline (I have no animals). 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 called the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had offered around 150,000 personalised books, mainly in the US, given that pivoting from putting together AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.
A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller expenses ₤ 26. The firm uses its own AI tools to them, based upon an open source big language design.
I'm not asking you to buy my book. Actually you can't - just Janet, who developed it, can order any more copies.
There is currently no barrier to anyone creating one in anybody's name, consisting of celebrities - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around violent content. Each book includes a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is imaginary, produced by AI, and created "entirely to bring humour and delight".
Legally, the copyright comes from the company, however Mr Mashiach worries that the product is meant as a "personalised gag gift", and the books do not get sold further.
He wants to widen his range, generating various genres such as sci-fi, and maybe using an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted form of customer AI - selling AI-generated items to human consumers.
It's likewise a bit scary if, like me, you write for a living. Not least since it most likely took less than a minute to generate, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound similar to me.
Musicians, authors, artists and actors worldwide have actually revealed alarm about their work being utilized to train generative AI tools that then churn out similar content 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, creator of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI firms to regard developers' rights.
"This is books, this is short articles, this is photos. 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 featuring AI-generated voices of Canadian vocalists Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social networks 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 trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were phony, it was still wildly popular.
"I do not believe using generative AI for imaginative functions need to be prohibited, however I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without consent need to be banned," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be extremely powerful however let's build it fairly and relatively."
OpenAI says 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 dents America's swagger
In the UK some organisations - including the BBC - have actually picked to block AI developers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have actually decided to team up - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for example.
The UK government is considering an overhaul of the law that would permit AI designers to use creators' material on the web to assist establish their designs, unless the rights holders opt out.
Ed Newton Rex explains this as "insanity".
He explains that AI can make advances in locations like defence, health care and logistics without trawling the work of authors, journalists 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 getting rid of copyright law for AI.
"Creative industries are wealth developers, 2.4 million tasks and a lot of pleasure," says the Baroness, who is also a consultant to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.
"The federal government is undermining among its finest performing industries on the vague pledge of development."
A government representative stated: "No relocation will be made till we are absolutely positive we have a useful plan that provides each of our objectives: increased control for ideal holders to assist them accredit their material, access to top quality material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more openness for best holders from AI developers."
Under the UK federal government's new AI plan, a national information library including public data from a vast array of sources will likewise be offered to AI researchers.
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 aimed to increase the safety of AI with, amongst other things, companies in the sector required 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 remains to be seen what Trump will do instead, however he is said to want the AI sector to deal with less guideline.
This comes as a variety of suits against AI firms, and especially against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been gotten by everybody from the New york city Times to authors, music labels, and even a comic.
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 "fair use" and are therefore exempt. There are a number of factors which can make up reasonable usage - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it gathers training information and whether it need to be paying for it.
If this wasn't all enough to ponder, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek has shaken the sector over the previous week. It became one of the most downloaded complimentary app on Apple's US App Store.
DeepSeek declares that it established its innovation for a fraction of the rate of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security concerns in the US, and threatens American's present supremacy of the sector.
As for accc.rcec.sinica.edu.tw me and a profession as an author, I think that at the minute, if I actually want a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weak point in generative AI tools for bigger jobs. It has plenty of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be rather hard to check out in parts because it's so verbose.
But provided how rapidly the tech is evolving, I'm not exactly sure the length of time I can remain confident that my considerably slower human writing and modifying skills, are much better.
Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the most significant advancements in worldwide technology, with analysis from BBC reporters worldwide.
Outside the UK? Sign up here.
1
How an AI-written Book Shows why the Tech 'Terrifies' Creatives
Mattie Ryan edited this page 2025-02-02 15:00:14 -05:00