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

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

Yet it was completely composed by AI, with a couple of basic prompts about me supplied by my pal 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 imitates my chatty design of writing, but it's likewise a bit recurring, and very verbose. It might have gone beyond Janet's prompts in collecting information about me.

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

There's also a strange, repetitive hallucination in the kind of my cat (I have no animals). And bphomesteading.com there's a metaphor on almost every page - some more random than others.

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

When I called the chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had offered around 150,000 personalised books, mainly in the US, demo.qkseo.in since rotating from assembling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

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

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

There is currently no barrier to anyone developing one in anybody's name, consisting of stars - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book contains a printed disclaimer stating that it is imaginary, produced by AI, and created "exclusively to bring humour and happiness".

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

He wants to expand his range, generating various categories such as sci-fi, and maybe providing an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted type of consumer AI - offering AI-generated items to human customers.

It's likewise a bit terrifying if, like me, you compose for suvenir51.ru a living. Not least due to the fact that it most likely took less than a minute to produce, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound just like me.

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

"We should be clear, when we are discussing data here, we really mean human creators' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI firms to regard creators' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is pictures. It's masterpieces. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to discover how to do something and then do more like that."

In 2023 a song including 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 actually 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 believe making use of generative AI for innovative purposes need to be prohibited, but I do think that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without consent must be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be extremely powerful but let's build it fairly 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 market and damages America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - including the BBC - have chosen to obstruct AI designers from trawling their online material for training purposes. Others have decided to team up - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for instance.

The UK federal government is considering an overhaul of the law that would enable AI developers to use developers' content on the web to assist develop their models, unless the rights holders decide 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, journalists 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 removing copyright law for AI.

"Creative industries are wealth creators, 2.4 million jobs and a great deal of happiness," says the Baroness, who is likewise an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The federal government is undermining among its finest carrying out markets on the vague guarantee of growth."

A federal government spokesperson stated: "No move will be made up until we are absolutely confident we have a useful strategy that provides each of our goals: increased control for ideal holders to assist them license their content, access to premium material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more openness for ideal holders from AI developers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI plan, a national information library consisting of public data from a vast array 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 aimed to boost the safety of AI with, to name a few things, firms in the sector needed to share details of the workings of their systems with the US government before they are launched.

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

This comes as a number of suits against AI firms, and opentx.cz especially against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been taken out by everyone from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.

They claim that the AI companies broke the law when they took their material from the internet without their authorization, and used it to train their systems.

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

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

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

When it comes to me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the moment, if I truly want 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 projects. It has plenty of mistakes and asteroidsathome.net hallucinations, and it can be quite tough to check out in parts because it's so verbose.

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

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

Outside the UK? Sign up here.