For Christmas I got an interesting present from a pal - my very own "very popular" book.

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

Yet it was completely composed by AI, with a couple of easy triggers about me supplied by my good friend Janet.

It's an interesting read, and uproarious in parts. But it also meanders quite a lot, and is somewhere between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It simulates my chatty design of composing, but it's likewise a bit repeated, and extremely verbose. It may have surpassed Janet's triggers in looking at data about me.

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

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

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

When I got in touch with the primary executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had sold around 150,000 personalised books, generally in the US, given that rotating from putting together AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

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

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

There is presently no barrier to anybody developing one in anybody's name, including celebs - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book contains a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is fictional, produced by AI, and designed "solely to bring humour and pleasure".

Legally, the copyright comes from the company, however Mr Mashiach worries that the item is meant as a "customised gag present", and the books do not get offered further.

He hopes to expand his variety, creating various genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps offering an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted form of customer AI - offering AI-generated products to human clients.

It's likewise a bit terrifying if, like me, you write for a living. Not least because it probably took less than a minute to create, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound just like me.

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

"We ought to be clear, when we are talking about information here, we in fact suggest human developers' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI companies to regard 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 after that do more like that."

In 2023 a tune featuring AI-generated voices of Canadian singers Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social networks before being pulled from streaming platforms since it was not their work and they had not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's developer attempting to choose it for a Grammy award. And although the artists were phony, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not think the use of generative AI for creative functions should be banned, but I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without approval need to be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be very effective but let's develop it fairly and fairly."

OpenAI says Chinese competitors utilizing its work for wiki.myamens.com 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 selected to block AI developers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have actually chosen to work together - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for example.

The UK government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would enable AI developers to use creators' content on the internet to assist develop their models, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "insanity".

He explains that AI can make advances in areas like defence, health care and logistics without trawling the work of authors, forum.pinoo.com.tr journalists and artists.

"All of these things work without going and altering copyright law and destroying the incomes of the country's creatives," he argues.

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

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

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

A government representative said: "No move will be made up until we are absolutely confident we have a practical plan that provides each of our goals: increased control for ideal holders to help them certify their content, access to top quality product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more transparency for ideal holders from AI designers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI strategy, a nationwide data library containing public information from a wide range of sources will also be provided to AI scientists.

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 increase the safety of AI with, to name a few things, companies in the sector needed to share information of the workings of their systems with the US government before they are released.

But this has now been reversed by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do instead, but he is said to want the AI sector to face less regulation.

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

They declare that the AI companies broke the law when they took their material from the web without their approval, and utilized it to train their systems.

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "fair usage" and are therefore exempt. There are a variety of aspects which can constitute reasonable use - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it gathers training information and whether it ought to be spending for it.

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

that it developed its technology for a portion of the rate of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's current supremacy of the sector.

When it comes to me and a career as an author, I believe that at the moment, if I truly desire a "bestseller" I'll still need to compose it myself. If anything, bphomesteading.com Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weakness in generative AI tools for bigger projects. It is complete of errors and hallucinations, and it can be quite hard to check out in parts due to the fact that it's so verbose.

But given how quickly the tech is evolving, I'm not sure for how long I can stay positive that my considerably slower human writing and editing skills, are better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest developments in international technology, with analysis from BBC reporters all over the world.

Outside the UK? Register here.