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

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

Yet it was completely written by AI, with a few basic triggers about me supplied by my pal Janet.

It's an interesting read, and uproarious 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 design of writing, however it's likewise a bit repeated, and extremely verbose. It might have gone beyond Janet's prompts in collecting data about me.

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

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

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

When I got in touch with the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had offered around 150,000 personalised books, mainly in the US, because pivoting from assembling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller expenses ₤ 26. The company utilizes its own AI tools to create them, based on 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 purchase any further copies.

There is presently no barrier to anybody creating one in any person's name, consisting of celebs - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book includes a printed disclaimer stating that it is fictional, produced by AI, and designed "entirely to bring humour and delight".

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

He hopes to broaden his variety, producing various genres such as sci-fi, and maybe offering an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted type of customer AI - offering AI-generated products to human consumers.

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

Musicians, authors, artists and actors worldwide have actually revealed alarm about their work being used to train generative AI tools that then produce comparable content based upon it.

"We need to be clear, when we are talking about data here, we actually mean human developers' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI firms to regard developers' rights.

"This is books, this is articles, this is pictures. It's artworks. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to find out how to do something and then do more like that."

In 2023 a tune featuring AI-generated voices of Canadian vocalists 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 consented to it. It didn't stop the track's developer attempting to nominate it for a Grammy award. And although the artists were phony, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not think making use of generative AI for innovative purposes should be banned, but I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without approval should be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be very powerful however let's construct it ethically and fairly."

OpenAI states 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 dents America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - consisting of the BBC - have actually chosen to block AI designers from trawling their online content for training purposes. Others have chosen to team up - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for instance.

The UK federal government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would permit AI designers to use developers' material on the web to help establish their designs, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

He explains 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 destroying the incomes of the nation's creatives," he argues.

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

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

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

A government representative stated: "No relocation will be made until we are definitely confident we have a useful strategy that delivers each of our objectives: increased control for right holders to assist them certify their content, access to high-quality product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more openness for right holders from AI designers."

Under the UK federal government's brand-new AI strategy, a national information library including public data from a broad range of sources will likewise be offered to AI scientists.

In the US the future of federal guidelines 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 safety of AI with, to name a few things, companies in the sector required to share details of the workings of their systems with the US federal government before they are launched.

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

This comes as a number of claims against AI firms, and forum.pinoo.com.tr especially against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been secured by everybody from the New York Times to authors, asteroidsathome.net music labels, and even a comedian.

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

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "reasonable use" and are therefore exempt. There are a number of elements which can make up fair use - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it collects training data and whether it need to be paying for it.

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

DeepSeek claims that it developed its technology for a portion 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 profession as an author, I think that at the moment, if I really desire a "bestseller" I'll still have to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weak point in generative AI tools for larger tasks. It is complete of errors and hallucinations, and it can be quite hard to read in parts since it's so verbose.

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

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest developments in worldwide innovation, with analysis from BBC reporters worldwide.

Outside the UK? Register here.