For Christmas I received an intriguing present from a buddy - my really own "very popular" book.

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

Yet it was totally composed by AI, with a couple of easy triggers about me supplied by my buddy Janet.

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

It simulates my chatty style of writing, but it's likewise a bit recurring, and really verbose. It may have exceeded Janet's prompts in collecting data about me.

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

There's likewise a mystical, repetitive hallucination in the type of my cat (I have no animals). And there's a metaphor on almost 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 told me he had actually offered around 150,000 personalised books, mainly in the US, considering that pivoting 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 upon an open source big language model.

I'm not asking you to buy my book. Actually you can't - just Janet, who created it, can order any additional copies.

There is currently no barrier to anybody developing one in any person's name, consisting of celebrities - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book contains a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is imaginary, developed by AI, and created "solely to bring humour and pleasure".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the firm, but Mr Mashiach worries that the item is intended as a "customised gag present", and the books do not get offered even more.

He intends to broaden his range, generating different genres such as sci-fi, and possibly using an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted form of consumer AI - offering AI-generated products to human clients.

It's also a bit terrifying if, forum.altaycoins.com like me, you compose for a living. Not least since it most likely took less than a minute to create, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound similar to me.

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

"We should be clear, when we are discussing data here, we in fact imply human developers' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI firms to respect creators' rights.

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

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

"I do not think the use of generative AI for imaginative purposes should be banned, however I do think that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without permission ought to be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be really effective but let's develop it fairly and relatively."

OpenAI says Chinese rivals using its work for drapia.org 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 - consisting of the BBC - have selected to block AI designers from trawling their online content for training purposes. Others have chosen to work together - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for instance.

The UK government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would permit AI developers to use creators' material on the web to assist develop their designs, unless the rights holders choose out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

He explains 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 altering copyright law and ruining the incomes of the country's creatives," he argues.

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

"Creative industries are wealth developers, 2.4 million tasks and a great deal of delight," says the Baroness, who is likewise a consultant to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The government is weakening among its finest performing industries on the vague pledge of development."

A federal government spokesperson said: "No relocation will be made till we are definitely confident we have a practical plan that delivers each of our objectives: increased control for right holders to assist them accredit their material, access to high-quality material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more transparency for right holders from AI developers."

Under the UK government's brand-new AI strategy, a national data library containing public data from a large range of sources will also be provided to AI researchers.

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 boost the security of AI with, among other things, firms in the sector needed to share information of the workings of their systems with the US government before they are launched.

But this has now been rescinded by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do instead, but he is stated to desire the AI sector to deal with less guideline.

This comes as a number of suits against AI firms, and especially versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been taken out by everybody from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comic.

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

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "fair use" and are for that reason exempt. There are a variety of factors which can make up reasonable usage - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector cadizpedia.wikanda.es is under increasing analysis over how it gathers training information and whether it should be paying for it.

If this wasn't all enough to ponder, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek has shaken the sector over the previous week. It ended up being the many downloaded totally free app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek claims that it established its innovation for a fraction of the rate of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's current 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 present weak point in generative AI tools for larger jobs. It has lots of errors and hallucinations, and it can be quite tough to read in parts due to the fact that it's so verbose.

But offered how rapidly the tech is evolving, I'm uncertain for how long I can stay confident that my substantially slower human writing and modifying abilities, are much better.

for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the greatest advancements in global technology, with analysis from BBC reporters all over the world.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.