For Christmas I got a fascinating present from a friend - my really own "best-selling" book.

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

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

It's a fascinating read, and uproarious in parts. But it likewise meanders quite a lot, and is somewhere 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 might have exceeded Janet's prompts in collecting information about me.

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

There's also a strange, repetitive hallucination in the form of my feline (I have no family pets). And there's a on almost every page - some more random than others.

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

When I called the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had offered around 150,000 personalised books, generally in the US, considering that rotating 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 utilizes its own AI tools to create them, based upon an open source large language model.

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

There is presently no barrier to anybody developing one in any person's name, including stars - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around violent content. Each book contains a printed disclaimer specifying that it is imaginary, developed by AI, and created "solely to bring humour and pleasure".

Legally, the copyright comes from the firm, however Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is intended as a "customised gag gift", and the books do not get offered further.

He hopes to expand his range, producing various categories such as sci-fi, and perhaps using an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted form of customer AI - selling AI-generated items to human clients.

It's likewise a bit terrifying if, like me, you write for a living. Not least due to the fact that it probably took less than a minute to produce, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound much like me.

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

"We need to be clear, when we are discussing information here, we in fact indicate human creators' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to respect creators' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is pictures. 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 tune including AI-generated voices of Canadian vocalists Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social networks before being pulled from streaming platforms since it was not their work and they had actually not granted it. It didn't stop the track's developer attempting to nominate it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were fake, memorial-genweb.org it was still hugely popular.

"I do not think making use of generative AI for imaginative purposes ought to be prohibited, but I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without permission should be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be extremely powerful but let's develop it morally and relatively."

OpenAI states Chinese rivals using 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 - including the BBC - have actually picked to obstruct AI designers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have chosen to collaborate - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for example.

The UK federal government is considering an overhaul of the law that would enable AI designers to utilize developers' content on the web to help develop their models, unless the rights holders opt 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, reporters and artists.

"All of these things work without going and altering copyright law and ruining the livelihoods of the nation's creatives," he argues.

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

"Creative industries are wealth creators, 2.4 million tasks and a lot of delight," 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 finest performing markets on the unclear pledge of growth."

A government spokesperson said: "No move will be made till we are definitely positive we have a useful plan that provides each of our objectives: increased control for ideal holders to assist them accredit their content, access to premium material to train leading AI models in the UK, and more openness for ideal holders from AI designers."

Under the UK federal government's brand-new AI strategy, a national data library containing public information from a wide variety of sources will likewise be provided to AI researchers.

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

But this has actually now been reversed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do instead, however he is stated to want the AI sector to deal with less regulation.

This comes as a variety of suits versus AI companies, photorum.eclat-mauve.fr and particularly against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been secured 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 content from the web without their consent, and used it to train their systems.

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

If this wasn't all adequate to contemplate, Chinese AI company DeepSeek has actually shaken the sector over the past week. It ended up being the many downloaded complimentary app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek declares that it established its innovation for a portion of the price of the similarity 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, yogaasanas.science I think that at the moment, wiki.lafabriquedelalogistique.fr 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 larger jobs. It has lots of errors and hallucinations, and it can be rather challenging to read in parts because it's so verbose.

But offered how quickly the tech is developing, I'm unsure the length of time I can remain confident that my substantially slower human writing and editing skills, are better.

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

Outside the UK? Register here.