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

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

Yet it was entirely composed by AI, with a few easy triggers about me provided by my friend Janet.

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

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

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

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

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

When I called the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had sold around 150,000 personalised books, engel-und-waisen.de primarily in the US, since pivoting from assembling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller costs ₤ 26. The 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 purchase any further copies.

There is currently no barrier to anyone producing one in any person's name, consisting of celebs - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer stating that it is fictional, developed by AI, and developed "exclusively to bring humour and delight".

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

He hopes to expand his variety, producing various genres such as sci-fi, and possibly offering an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted kind of consumer AI - selling AI-generated goods to human consumers.

It's also a bit terrifying if, like me, you write for a living. Not least because 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 stars worldwide have revealed alarm about their work being used to train generative AI tools that then churn out comparable content 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, creator of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI companies to regard creators' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is images. It's works of art. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to learn how to do something and after that do more like that."

In 2023 a song featuring AI-generated voices of Canadian vocalists Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social media before being pulled from streaming platforms because it was not their work and they had actually not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's developer trying to nominate it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were fake, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not believe making use of generative AI for creative purposes should be prohibited, but I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without permission need to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be extremely powerful however let's construct it ethically and relatively."

OpenAI states Chinese competitors utilizing 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 - consisting of the BBC - have chosen to block AI developers from trawling their online material for training purposes. Others have chosen to work together - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for example.

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

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

He mentions that AI can make advances in areas 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 messing up the incomes of the nation's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, wavedream.wiki is likewise strongly versus removing copyright law for AI.

"Creative markets are wealth developers, 2.4 million jobs and a whole lot of happiness," says the Baroness, who is likewise an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The federal government is undermining one of its best carrying out markets on the unclear guarantee of development."

A government representative said: "No relocation will be made till we are definitely positive we have a practical strategy that provides each of our objectives: increased control for ideal holders to assist them license their content, access to premium material to train leading AI models in the UK, and more openness for best holders from AI developers."

Under the UK government's new AI plan, a national data library including public data from a large range of sources will likewise be made 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 return to the presidency.

In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that aimed to boost the safety of AI with, among other things, firms in the sector needed 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 rather, however he is said to want the AI sector to face less policy.

This comes as a number of suits against AI firms, and particularly against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been secured by everyone from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.

They declare that the AI firms broke the law when they took their material from the web without their approval, and utilized it to train their systems.

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "fair use" and prazskypantheon.cz are therefore exempt. There are a number of elements which can make up fair usage - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing analysis over how it gathers training information and whether it ought to be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek declares that it established its technology for a portion of the rate of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's existing dominance of the sector.

When it comes to me and a career as an author, I think that at the moment, if I truly desire a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weakness in generative AI tools for larger jobs. It is complete of inaccuracies and hallucinations, and larsaluarna.se it can be rather difficult to check out in parts since it's so verbose.

But given how rapidly the tech is evolving, I'm unsure how long I can stay confident that my substantially slower human writing and editing abilities, are much better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the greatest developments in worldwide technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents around the world.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.