Bbc
A friend had her book created in a Christmas present
For Christmas, I received an interesting gift from a friend – my own book “The best -selling”.
“Tech-Splining for Dummies” (excellent title) bears my name and my photo on his cover, and he has elegant criticism.
However, it was entirely written by AI, with a few simple prompts on me provided by my friend Janet.
It is an interesting reading, and very funny in games. But that also winds a lot and is somewhere between a self-assistance book and a flow of anecdotes.
It imitates my talkative writing style, but it is also a little repetitive and very verbose. This may have exceeded Janet’s prompts to collect data on me.
Several sentences begin “as a leading technological journalist …” – cringing teeth – which could have been scraped with an online biography.
There is also a mysterious and repeated hallucination in the form of my cat (I have no pets). And there is a metaphor on almost all pages – a little more random than others.
There are dozens of online companies offering Bive writing services. My book was from Bookbyanyone.
When I contacted CEO Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me that he had sold about 150,000 personalized pounds, mainly in the United States, since he pivoted the travel guides generated by AI in June 2024.
A pocket book copy of your own 240-page bestseller costs £ 26. The company uses its own AI tools to generate them, based on an open source wide language model.
I don’t ask you to buy my book. In fact, you cannot – only Janet, who created it, can order other copies.
There is currently no obstacle to anyone by creating one in the name of anyone, including celebrities – although Mr. Mashiach says that there are railings around abusive content. Each book contains a printed warning indicating that it is fictitious, created by AI, and designed “only to bring humor and joy”.
Legally, copyright belongs to the company, but Mr. Mashiach stresses that the product is intended for a “personalized gag gift” and that books are not sold further.
He hopes to expand his range, generate different genres such as science fiction, and perhaps offer an autobiography service. It is designed to be a light form of growing AI – selling products generated by AI to human customers.
It is also a little terrifying if, like me, you write to make a living. Not the least because it probably took less than a minute to generate, and it does, certainly in some parts, looks like me.
Getty images
The voices of singers Drake and The Weeknd were used in a song created by AI without their permission
Musicians, authors, artists and actors around the world have expressed an alarm that their work was used to train generative AI tools which then produced similar content as a function.
“We must be clear, when we talk about data here, we really want to say that the work of the life of human creators,” explains Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Formd, who camp so that AI companies respect the Creators’ rights.
“These are books, they are articles, they are photos. These are works of art. These are records … The best interest in the training of AI is to learn to do something and to Do more like that. “
In 2023, a song featuring voices generated by the AI of Canadian singers Drake and The Weeknd became viral on social networks before being removed from streaming platforms because it was not their work and they ‘There had not been agreed. This did not prevent the creator of the track from trying to name it for a Grammy Award. And even if the artists were false, he was still very popular.
“I do not think that the use of a generative AI for creative purposes should be prohibited, but I think that the AI generating these purposes which is trained at the work of people without authorization should be prohibited,” adds Mr. Newton Rex. “The AI can be very powerful, but let’s build it ethically and fairly.”
In the United Kingdom, some organizations – including BBC – have chosen to prevent AI developers from chasing their content online for training purposes. Others have decided to collaborate – the Financial Times has teamed up with Chatgpt Creator Openai for example.
The British government is considering a recasting of the law which would allow the developers of the AI to use the content of creators on the Internet to help develop their models, unless rights holders undress.
Ed Newton Rex describes this as a “madness”.
He stresses that AI can make progress in fields such as defense, health care and logistics without chasing the work of authors, journalists and artists.
“All these things work without going and changing the law on copyright and ruining the means of subsistence of the creatives of the country,” he said.
Baroness Kidron, a crossed peer in the Chamber of Lords, is also strongly against the elimination of the Act of Copyright for AI.
“The creative industries are creators of wealth, 2.4 million jobs and a lot of joy,” explains the Baroness, who is also an advisor to the AI Ethics Institute at the University of Oxford.
“The government undermines one of its most efficient industries on the vague promise of growth.”
A government spokesperson said: “No decision will be practiced as long as we are absolutely convinced that we have a practical plan that provides each of our objectives: increased control for rights to help them models in the United Kingdom, and More transparency for the rights of AI developers. “
As part of the new British government AI plan, a national data library containing public data from a wide range of sources will also be made available to IA researchers.
In the United States, the future of federal rules to control AI is now in the air after President Trump’s return to the presidency.
In 2023, Biden signed an executive decree aimed at stimulating the security of the AI with, among other things, companies in the sector required to share the details of the operation of their systems with the American government before their publication.
But it has now been repealed by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do instead, but it is said that he wanted the AI sector to be faced with less regulation.
This comes as a number of prosecutions against AI companies, and in particular against Openai, continue in the United States. They were withdrawn by everyone from the New York Times to the authors, music labels and even an actor.
They claim that AI companies have broken the law when they took their internet content without their consent and used it to train their systems.
AI companies argue that their actions are “used” and are therefore exempt. There are a number of factors that can be fair use – this is not a simple definition. But the AI sector is being controlled on how it collects training data and if it should pay it.
If that was not enough to think, the Chinese AI firm Deepseek shaken the sector during last week. It has become the most downloaded free application on the Apple App Store.
Deepseek says it has developed its technology for a fraction of the Openai Prize. Its success has raised security problems in the United States and threatens the current domination of the United States in the sector.
As for me and an author career, I think that for the moment, if I really want a “bestseller”, I will always have to write it myself. If anything, technology technology for models highlights the current weakness of AI generative tools for the biggest projects. It is full of inaccuracies and hallucinations, and it can be quite difficult to read in parts because it is so long.
But given the speed with which technology evolves, I do not know how long I can remain confident that my skills in writing and in considerably slower human modification are better.
Learn more about global trade stories
Source link
