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

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

Yet it was entirely composed by AI, with a few easy triggers about me provided by my buddy 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 simulates my chatty design of composing, however it's likewise a bit repeated, and very verbose. It might have exceeded Janet's prompts in collating information about me.

Several sentences start "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 feline (I have no family pets). 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 primary executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had sold around 150,000 customised books, generally in the US, considering that rotating from assembling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller costs ₤ 26. The company uses its own AI tools to create them, based upon an open source large language model.

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

There is currently no barrier to anyone producing one in anybody's name, including celebs - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer stating that it is imaginary, developed by AI, and created "entirely to bring humour and pleasure".

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

He intends to expand his range, generating various genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps providing an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted form of consumer AI - selling AI-generated products to human customers.

It's also a bit frightening if, like me, you write for a living. Not least because it probably took less than a minute to create, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound similar to me.

Musicians, authors, surgiteams.com artists and stars worldwide have expressed alarm about their work being used to train generative AI tools that then produce comparable content based upon it.

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

"This is books, this is posts, this is pictures. It's artworks. 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 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 not granted it. It didn't stop the track's developer trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And although the artists were fake, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not think the usage of generative AI for innovative purposes need to be banned, however I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without authorization ought to be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be really effective but let's construct it morally and fairly."

OpenAI says Chinese rivals 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 - consisting of the BBC - have actually selected to obstruct AI designers from trawling their online content for training purposes. Others have decided to team up - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for instance.

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

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "insanity".

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 destroying the livelihoods of the nation's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, iuridictum.pecina.cz is also highly versus eliminating copyright law for AI.

"Creative markets are wealth developers, 2.4 million tasks and a whole lot of joy," states the Baroness, who is likewise a consultant to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The government is weakening among its best performing industries on the unclear promise of growth."

A federal government representative stated: "No move will be made until we are absolutely confident we have a useful plan that provides each of our objectives: increased control for ideal holders to assist them certify their content, access to premium material to train leading AI models in the UK, and more transparency for ideal holders from AI developers."

Under the UK federal government's brand-new AI plan, a nationwide data library containing public data from a vast array of sources will also be offered 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 intended to boost the safety of AI with, among other things, firms in the sector required to share information of the operations of their systems with the US government before they are launched.

But this has actually now been rescinded by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do rather, but he is said to want the AI sector to deal with less guideline.

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

They declare that the AI companies broke the law when they took their content from the internet without their permission, and used it to train their systems.

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "fair use" and pediascape.science are for that reason exempt. There are a variety of factors which can constitute reasonable usage - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it gathers training data and whether it need to be spending for it.

If this wasn't all adequate to ponder, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek has actually 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 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 current supremacy of the sector.

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

But offered how rapidly the tech is progressing, I'm unsure for how long I can remain positive that my considerably slower human writing and modifying abilities, are much better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the most significant developments in international technology, with analysis from BBC reporters around the world.

Outside the UK? Register here.