For Christmas I received an interesting gift from a pal - my really own "best-selling" book.

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

Yet it was totally composed by AI, with a few basic triggers about me supplied by my buddy Janet.

It's a fascinating read, and very funny in parts. But it also meanders rather a lot, and is someplace in between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It simulates my chatty style of composing, but it's likewise a bit repeated, and really verbose. It might have surpassed Janet's prompts in looking at information about me.

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

There's also a mystical, repetitive hallucination in the type of my cat (I have no animals). And there's a metaphor on practically 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 got in touch with the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually sold around 150,000 customised books, primarily in the US, since pivoting from compiling 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 produce them, based upon an open source big language model.

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

There is currently no barrier to anyone creating one in anyone's name, including celebrities - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer specifying that it is imaginary, produced by AI, and created "entirely to bring humour and joy".

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

He wishes to broaden his variety, creating different categories such as sci-fi, and forum.pinoo.com.tr maybe providing an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted type of customer AI - selling AI-generated items to human consumers.

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

Musicians, authors, artists and stars worldwide have actually revealed alarm about their work being used to train generative AI tools that then churn out similar content based upon it.

"We ought to be clear, when we are speaking about information here, we actually suggest human developers' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI firms 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 discover how to do something and after that 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 since it was not their work and they had actually not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's developer attempting to nominate it for lovewiki.faith a Grammy award. And despite the fact that the artists were fake, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not believe making use of generative AI for creative purposes need to be banned, however I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without permission must be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be extremely powerful but let's build it fairly and relatively."

OpenAI says Chinese rivals using its work for links.gtanet.com.br their AI apps

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

China's DeepSeek AI shakes market and dents America's swagger

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

The UK government is considering an overhaul of the law that would allow AI developers to utilize creators' content on the web to assist develop their designs, unless the rights holders decide out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "insanity".

He mentions that AI can make advances in locations like defence, health care and logistics without trawling the work of authors, journalists and artists.

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

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, is also strongly against eliminating copyright law for AI.

"Creative industries are wealth developers, 2.4 million jobs and a great deal of happiness," states the Baroness, who is also a consultant to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The government is weakening one of its finest carrying out industries on the vague promise of growth."

A government representative stated: "No move will be made until we are definitely positive we have a useful plan that delivers each of our goals: increased control for best holders to help them accredit their content, access to high-quality material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more openness for right holders from AI developers."

Under the UK government's brand-new AI plan, a nationwide data library including public information from a vast array of sources will also be made available 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 intended to increase the security of AI with, amongst other things, firms in the sector needed to share information of the operations of their systems with the US federal 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 stated to desire the AI sector to face less policy.

This comes as a number of suits versus AI firms, and especially against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been gotten by everyone 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 content from the internet without their consent, and utilized it to train their systems.

The AI companies argue that their fall under "reasonable use" and are for that reason exempt. There are a number 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 collects training information and whether it need to be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek declares that it developed its innovation for a portion of the rate of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has raised security concerns in the US, and threatens American's current dominance of the sector.

As for me and a career as an author, I think that at the minute, if I truly want a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weak point in generative AI tools for bigger tasks. It has plenty of errors and hallucinations, and it can be rather challenging to read in parts due to the fact that it's so long-winded.

But provided how quickly the tech is evolving, I'm unsure for how long I can remain confident that my considerably slower human writing and kenpoguy.com modifying skills, are much better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the greatest developments in worldwide innovation, with analysis from BBC correspondents worldwide.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.