How an AI-written Book Shows why the Tech 'Frightens' Creatives

For Christmas I received a fascinating gift from a pal - my very own "very popular" book.

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

Yet it was entirely written by AI, with a few simple prompts about me provided by my buddy Janet.

It's an intriguing read, and extremely amusing in parts. But it likewise meanders rather a lot, and is someplace in between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It mimics my chatty style of composing, but it's likewise a bit repeated, and really verbose. It might have gone beyond Janet's triggers in looking at information about me.

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

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

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

When I called the chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually sold around 150,000 personalised 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 utilizes its own AI tools to create them, based upon an open source big language model.

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

There is presently no barrier to anyone creating one in anyone's name, consisting of stars - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around violent material. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is imaginary, developed by AI, and developed "exclusively to bring humour and happiness".

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

He wants to widen his variety, producing various genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps providing an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted kind of consumer AI - selling AI -generated goods to human clients.

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

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

"We must be clear, when we are discussing data here, we actually indicate human developers' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI firms to regard creators' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is photos. It's masterpieces. It's records ... The whole point of AI training is to find out 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 social networks 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 nominate it for a Grammy award. And although the artists were fake, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not think using generative AI for innovative functions ought to be banned, however I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without permission ought to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be extremely powerful but let's build it ethically and fairly."

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 industry and dents America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - including the BBC - have actually selected to obstruct AI developers from trawling their online content for training purposes. Others have actually chosen to collaborate - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for example.

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

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "insanity".

He points out that AI can make advances in areas 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 nation's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in the House of Lords, is also highly versus removing copyright law for AI.

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

"The government is undermining one of its best carrying out industries on the unclear guarantee of growth."

A federal government spokesperson said: "No move will be made up until we are absolutely positive we have a practical strategy that delivers each of our goals: increased control for best holders to help them accredit their material, 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 new AI plan, a national data library containing public data from a vast array of sources will likewise be offered to AI scientists.

In the US the future of federal rules 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 improve the security of AI with, among other things, companies in the sector required to share details of the operations of their systems with the US federal government before they are launched.

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

This comes as a variety of lawsuits against AI firms, and especially versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been gotten by everybody from the New york city Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.

They declare that the AI companies broke the law when they took their material from the web without their consent, and used it to train their systems.

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "fair usage" and bphomesteading.com are therefore exempt. There are a variety of factors which can make up reasonable usage - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it gathers training data and whether it must be spending for it.

If this wasn't all enough to ponder, Chinese AI company 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 established its innovation for a fraction of the price of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's existing supremacy of the sector.

When it comes to me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the moment, if I really want a "bestseller" I'll still have to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weakness in generative AI tools for bigger projects. It has plenty of mistakes and hallucinations, and smfsimple.com it can be rather hard to read in parts because it's so verbose.

But provided how rapidly the tech is developing, I'm unsure how long I can stay confident that my considerably slower human writing and editing skills, are much better.