Skip to content
GitLab
Projects Groups Topics Snippets
  • /
  • Help
    • Help
    • Support
    • Community forum
    • Submit feedback
    • Contribute to GitLab
  • Register
  • Sign in
  • Z zelfrijdendetaxibrugge
  • Project information
    • Project information
    • Activity
    • Labels
    • Members
  • Repository
    • Repository
    • Files
    • Commits
    • Branches
    • Tags
    • Contributor statistics
    • Graph
    • Compare revisions
  • Issues 10
    • Issues 10
    • List
    • Boards
    • Service Desk
    • Milestones
  • Merge requests 0
    • Merge requests 0
  • CI/CD
    • CI/CD
    • Pipelines
    • Jobs
    • Schedules
  • Deployments
    • Deployments
    • Environments
    • Releases
  • Packages and registries
    • Packages and registries
    • Package Registry
    • Container Registry
    • Infrastructure Registry
  • Monitor
    • Monitor
    • Incidents
  • Analytics
    • Analytics
    • Value stream
    • CI/CD
    • Repository
  • Wiki
    • Wiki
  • Snippets
    • Snippets
  • Activity
  • Graph
  • Create a new issue
  • Jobs
  • Commits
  • Issue Boards
Collapse sidebar
  • Loreen Dame
  • zelfrijdendetaxibrugge
  • Issues
  • #4
Closed
Open
Issue created Feb 02, 2025 by Loreen Dame@loreendame9909Owner

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


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

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

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

It's a fascinating read, and uproarious in parts. But it likewise meanders rather a lot, and is somewhere between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It simulates my chatty design of writing, however it's also a bit repetitive, and very verbose. It might have gone beyond Janet's triggers in collecting information about me.

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

There's also a mysterious, repetitive hallucination in the kind of my cat (I have no pets). And there's a metaphor on almost every page - some more random than others.

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

When I contacted the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had actually sold around 150,000 personalised books, primarily in the US, because rotating 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 produce them, based on 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 anyone developing one in any person's name, including celebs - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around violent material. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is fictional, created by AI, and developed "solely to bring humour and happiness".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the firm, but Mr Mashiach worries that the product is intended as a "personalised gag present", and the books do not get sold further.

He intends to broaden his variety, generating various genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps using an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted form of consumer AI - offering AI-generated items to human clients.

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

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

"We need to be clear, when we are talking about data here, we actually indicate human developers' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to regard creators' rights.

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

In 2023 a tune including AI-generated voices of Canadian vocalists 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 consented to it. It didn't stop the track's developer attempting to choose it for a Grammy award. And despite the fact that the artists were fake, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not believe making use of generative AI for creative purposes must be prohibited, 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 very effective but let's build it ethically and fairly."

OpenAI says 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 damages America's swagger

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

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

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

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

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

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

"Creative markets are wealth creators, 2.4 million tasks and a great deal of joy," states the Baroness, asteroidsathome.net who is likewise an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The government is weakening among its finest carrying out industries on the unclear pledge of growth."

A federal government spokesperson said: "No move will be made until we are absolutely positive we have a practical plan that provides each of our objectives: increased control for best holders to assist them certify their content, access to premium material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more openness for right holders from AI developers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI strategy, a nationwide information library containing public information from a broad variety of sources will also be offered to AI scientists.

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 aimed to increase the safety of AI with, to name a few things, companies in the sector needed to share details of the functions of their systems with the US federal government before they are launched.

But this has actually now been reversed by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do instead, however he is stated to desire the AI sector to face less guideline.

This comes as a number of suits against AI firms, and photorum.eclat-mauve.fr 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 comedian.

They claim 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 are for that reason exempt. There are a variety of aspects which can make up fair usage - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing analysis over how it collects training data and whether it must be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek claims that it established its innovation for a fraction of the price of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's current supremacy of the sector.

As for me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the moment, genbecle.com if I really desire a "bestseller" I'll still need to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weakness in generative AI tools for larger tasks. It has lots of errors and hallucinations, and it can be rather tough to check out in parts because it's so long-winded.

But offered how quickly the tech is developing, I'm uncertain how long I can stay positive 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 international technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents around the globe.

Outside the UK? Register here.

Assignee
Assign to
Time tracking