bodykinesthetics

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

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

Yet it was totally composed by AI, with a few simple triggers about me supplied by my good friend Janet.

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

It simulates my chatty design of writing, but it's also a bit repetitive, and really verbose. It may have gone beyond Janet's triggers in collating information about me.

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

There's also a mysterious, repetitive hallucination in the form of my feline (I have no animals). And there's a metaphor on nearly 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 actually offered around 150,000 customised books, mainly in the US, since rotating from assembling AI -generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller costs ₤ 26. The firm uses its own AI tools to generate them, based upon an open source large language model.

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

There is presently no barrier to anybody developing one in any person's name, including celebrities - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around violent content. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer stating that it is imaginary, created by AI, and created "solely to bring humour and happiness".

Legally, the copyright comes from the firm, however Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is intended as a "customised gag gift", and the books do not get sold further.

He wishes to widen his range, producing various genres such as sci-fi, and maybe providing an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted form of customer AI - offering AI -generated products to human customers.

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

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

"We must be clear, when we are speaking about data here, we actually imply human developers' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, founder 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 after that do more like that."

In 2023 a tune featuring AI -generated voices of Canadian singers Drake and The Weeknd went viral on before being pulled from streaming platforms due to the fact that it was not their work and they had actually not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's developer attempting to nominate it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were phony, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not believe the usage of generative AI for innovative purposes must be banned, however I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without approval must be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be extremely effective however let's construct it fairly and fairly."

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 industry and dents America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - including the BBC - have selected to obstruct AI designers from trawling their online content for training purposes. Others have actually decided to work together - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for instance.

The UK federal government is considering an overhaul of the law that would allow AI developers to utilize developers' material on the internet to assist establish their models, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "insanity".

He mentions that AI can make advances in areas like defence, health care and logistics without trawling the work of authors, reporters and artists.

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

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your house of Lords, is likewise strongly against eliminating copyright law for AI.

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

"The federal government is weakening among its best performing industries on the vague guarantee of growth."

A government representative stated: "No move will be made until we are definitely confident we have a practical strategy that delivers each of our objectives: increased control for best holders to assist them accredit their material, access to high-quality material to train leading AI models in the UK, and more transparency for ideal holders from AI designers."

Under the UK government's new AI strategy, a nationwide data library consisting of public information from a large range of sources will likewise 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 return to the presidency.

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

But this has actually now been rescinded by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do instead, but he is said to want the AI sector to face less regulation.

This comes as a variety of claims versus AI firms, and particularly versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been taken out by everyone from the New york city Times to authors, music labels, vmeste-so-vsemi.ru and even a comedian.

They claim 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 business argue that their actions fall under "fair usage" and are therefore exempt. There are a variety of elements which can constitute fair usage - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it collects training information and whether it must be spending for it.

If this wasn't all sufficient to ponder, Chinese AI company DeepSeek has actually shaken the sector over the past week. It ended up being one of the most downloaded complimentary app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek declares that it developed its technology for a fraction of the price of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's present dominance of the sector.

As for me and a profession as an author, I think that at the minute, if I really want a "bestseller" I'll still have to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weak point in generative AI tools for larger projects. It has lots of inaccuracies 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 progressing, I'm uncertain how long I can stay confident that my considerably slower human writing and modifying skills, are better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest developments in global technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents around the globe.

Outside the UK? Register here.