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

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

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

It's an intriguing read, and extremely amusing in parts. But it also meanders rather a lot, and is someplace between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It imitates my chatty style of composing, but it's also a bit repeated, and very verbose. It might have exceeded Janet's triggers in looking at data about me.

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

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

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

When I contacted the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had actually offered around 150,000 personalised books, lovewiki.faith generally in the US, videochatforum.ro considering 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 firm uses its own AI tools to create them, based on an open source large language design.

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

There is currently no barrier to anyone creating one in any person's name, including celebrities - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book contains a printed disclaimer specifying that it is fictional, produced by AI, and developed "entirely to bring humour and joy".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the company, but Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is meant as a "personalised gag gift", and the books do not get offered even more.

He intends to expand his variety, generating different genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps using an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted form of consumer AI - selling AI-generated items to human consumers.

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

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

"We need to be clear, when we are discussing data here, we in fact mean human creators' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which campaigns 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 find out how to do something and then do more like that."

In 2023 a tune including 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 actually not granted it. It didn't stop the track's developer trying to nominate it for a Grammy award. And despite the fact that the artists were phony, fishtanklive.wiki it was still hugely popular.

"I do not believe using generative AI for creative functions should be prohibited, but I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without consent ought to be banned," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be very powerful however let's build it fairly 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 damages America's swagger

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

The UK government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would enable AI developers to utilize developers' material on the web to help establish their designs, unless the rights holders opt out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "insanity".

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

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in the House of Lords, is likewise strongly against eliminating copyright law for AI.

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

"The federal government is undermining among its finest carrying out industries on the vague pledge of development."

A government spokesperson stated: "No relocation will be made up until we are definitely positive we have a useful strategy that provides each of our goals: increased control for right holders to help them license their material, access to premium product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more transparency for right holders from AI developers."

Under the UK government's new AI plan, a national information library including public information from a wide variety of sources will also be provided to AI scientists.

In the US the future of federal guidelines 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 enhance the security of AI with, to name a few things, firms in the sector needed to share information of the workings of their systems with the US federal government before they are launched.

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

This comes as a variety of suits versus AI companies, and particularly versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been taken out by everybody from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.

They declare that the AI the law when they took their content from the web without their approval, and used it to train their systems.

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

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

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

As for me and oke.zone a career as an author, I think that at the moment, if I actually desire a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the present weak point in generative AI tools for bigger tasks. It has lots of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be quite challenging to check out in parts due to the fact that it's so long-winded.

But provided how quickly the tech is developing, I'm not sure the length of time I can remain confident that my considerably slower human writing and editing abilities, are better.

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

Outside the UK? Register here.