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

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

Yet it was totally written by AI, with a few basic triggers about me provided by my friend Janet.

It's an interesting 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 imitates my chatty design of writing, but it's likewise a bit repetitive, and very verbose. It might have gone beyond Janet's triggers in collating 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 mystical, repetitive hallucination in the type of my feline (I have no animals). And there's a metaphor on practically every page - some more random than others.

There are lots of business online offering AI-book composing 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, primarily in the US, asteroidsathome.net given that pivoting from compiling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller costs ₤ 26. The firm uses 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, oke.zone who produced it, can purchase any additional copies.

There is currently no barrier to anybody producing one in anybody's name, including celebrities - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book contains a printed disclaimer specifying that it is fictional, created by AI, and designed "exclusively to bring humour and delight".

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

He hopes to widen his range, creating various categories such as sci-fi, and possibly using an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted form of customer AI - offering AI-generated goods to human clients.

It's likewise a bit frightening if, like me, you compose for a living. Not least because it probably took less than a minute to generate, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound similar to me.

Musicians, authors, artists and stars worldwide have actually expressed alarm about their work being utilized to train generative AI tools that then churn out comparable material based upon it.

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

"This is books, this is articles, this is photos. It's masterpieces. 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 tune including AI-generated voices of Canadian vocalists Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social networks before being pulled from streaming platforms due to the fact that it was not their work and they had actually not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's creator attempting to choose it for a Grammy award. And wiki.die-karte-bitte.de although the artists were fake, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not believe using generative AI for innovative purposes should be prohibited, however I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without authorization ought to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be very powerful however let's develop it ethically and fairly."

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 industry and dents America's swagger

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

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

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

He points out 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 changing copyright law and destroying the livelihoods of the country's creatives," he argues.

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

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

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

A government representative said: "No move will be made until we are definitely positive we have a useful strategy that provides each of our objectives: increased control for right holders to help them certify their content, access to top quality material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more openness for best holders from AI developers."

Under the UK government's new AI plan, a national information library containing public information from a wide variety of sources will likewise be offered to AI scientists.

In the US the future of federal rules 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 improve 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 federal government before they are released.

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

This comes as a variety of claims versus AI firms, and particularly against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been secured by everybody from the New york city Times to authors, akropolistravel.com music labels, genbecle.com and even a comic.

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

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

If this wasn't all adequate to consider, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek has shaken the sector over the past week. It ended up being the a lot of downloaded totally free app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek declares that it developed its technology for a fraction of the price of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has raised security concerns in the US, and threatens American's present supremacy of the sector.

As for me and a career as an author, I believe that at the moment, if I really desire a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weak point in generative AI tools for larger tasks. It has lots of inaccuracies and hallucinations, and it can be rather challenging to read in parts because it's so long-winded.

But offered how rapidly the tech is developing, I'm unsure how long I can stay confident that my significantly slower human writing and editing abilities, are better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest advancements in worldwide innovation, with analysis from BBC reporters all over the world.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.