For I got a fascinating gift from a buddy - my really own "best-selling" book.

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (excellent title) bears my name and wiki.monnaie-libre.fr my photo on its cover, and it has glowing evaluations.

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

It's a fascinating read, forum.batman.gainedge.org 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 mimics my chatty style of writing, however it's likewise a bit recurring, and extremely verbose. It might have gone beyond Janet's triggers in looking at data about me.

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

There's also a mysterious, repetitive hallucination in the kind of my feline (I have no family pets). And 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 president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually sold around 150,000 customised books, mainly in the US, because 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 uses its own AI tools to create them, based upon an open source big language model.

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

There is presently no barrier to anyone producing one in anyone's name, consisting of celebs - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around violent content. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is fictional, developed by AI, and created "exclusively to bring humour and happiness".

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

He hopes to widen his range, generating various genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps using an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted type 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 since it probably took less than a minute to produce, and it does, certainly in some parts, oke.zone sound just like me.

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

"We must be clear, when we are discussing data here, we in fact mean human developers' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, creator yogaasanas.science of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to regard developers' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is photos. It's works of art. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to learn how to do something and then do more like that."

In 2023 a song including AI-generated voices of Canadian singers Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social media 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 trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And despite the fact that the artists were phony, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not believe making use of generative AI for creative purposes must be banned, however I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without approval ought to be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be really powerful however let's build it fairly and relatively."

OpenAI says Chinese competitors utilizing its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: dokuwiki.stream 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 picked to block AI developers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have actually decided to team up - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for instance.

The UK government is considering an overhaul of the law that would allow AI designers to use creators' content on the web to help develop their models, unless the rights holders decide out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

He points out that AI can make advances in areas like defence, healthcare 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 the House of Lords, is also strongly versus removing copyright law for AI.

"Creative markets are wealth developers, 2.4 million jobs and a whole lot of delight," says the Baroness, who is also an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The government is undermining among its finest carrying out industries on the unclear pledge of growth."

A federal government representative stated: "No move will be made till we are definitely confident we have a useful plan that delivers each of our objectives: increased control for ideal holders to assist them accredit their content, access to premium product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more transparency for right holders from AI developers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI plan, a national data library consisting of public data from a wide range of sources will also be made readily available to AI researchers.

In the US the future of federal rules to manage AI is now up in the air following President Trump's return to the presidency.

In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that aimed to improve the security of AI with, to name a few things, companies in the sector required to share details of the functions of their systems with the US government before they are launched.

But this has actually now been rescinded by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do instead, but he is stated to want the AI sector to face less policy.

This comes as a variety of claims versus AI firms, and particularly versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been secured by everybody from the New york city Times to authors, music labels, and even a comic.

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

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "reasonable usage" and are for that reason exempt. There are a number of factors which can constitute fair usage - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it collects training data and whether it should be spending for it.

If this wasn't all enough to ponder, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek has actually shaken the sector over the past week. It became one of the most downloaded free app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek claims that it established its innovation for a portion of the rate of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security concerns in the US, and threatens American's present dominance of the sector.

When it comes to me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the minute, if I really desire a "bestseller" I'll still need to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weakness in generative AI tools for larger projects. It has lots of errors and hallucinations, and it can be rather tough to read in parts because it's so verbose.

But provided how rapidly the tech is evolving, I'm not exactly sure the length of time I can stay positive that my substantially slower human writing and modifying skills, are better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the most significant advancements in global technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents worldwide.

Outside the UK? Register here.