For Christmas I got an intriguing gift from a buddy - my extremely own "best-selling" book.

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

Yet it was entirely written by AI, with a couple of basic triggers about me supplied by my pal Janet.

It's an interesting 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 simulates my chatty style of composing, but it's likewise a bit recurring, and very verbose. It may have exceeded Janet's triggers in looking at information about me.

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

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

There are lots of companies online offering AI-book writing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I contacted the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually sold around 150,000 personalised books, mainly in the US, because pivoting 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 generate them, setiathome.berkeley.edu based on an open source large language design.

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

There is currently no barrier to anyone producing one in anyone's name, consisting of celebrities - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around violent material. Each book includes a printed disclaimer specifying that it is imaginary, developed by AI, and developed "solely to bring humour and joy".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the firm, but Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is intended as a "customised gag gift", and the books do not get offered further.

He hopes to widen his range, producing various genres such as sci-fi, and possibly providing an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted type of consumer AI - offering AI-generated goods to human clients.

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

Musicians, authors, classifieds.ocala-news.com artists and stars worldwide have actually expressed alarm about their work being used to train generative AI tools that then produce similar content based upon it.

"We should be clear, when we are speaking about information here, we actually mean human creators' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to respect developers' rights.

"This is books, this is short articles, this is images. It's artworks. 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 song including AI-generated voices of Canadian singers Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social networks before being pulled from streaming platforms due to the fact that it was not their work and they had not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's developer attempting to nominate it for a Grammy award. And although the artists were phony, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not think using generative AI for innovative functions ought to be banned, however I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without permission should be banned," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be very effective however let's build it ethically and relatively."

OpenAI states Chinese rivals using its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

China's DeepSeek AI shakes market and archmageriseswiki.com damages America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - consisting of the BBC - have picked to obstruct AI developers from trawling their online material for training purposes. Others have decided to work together - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for example.

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

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "insanity".

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

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

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

"Creative markets are wealth developers, 2.4 million jobs and an entire 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 best performing industries on the vague pledge of development."

A federal government representative stated: "No move will be made until we are absolutely confident we have a practical plan that delivers each of our goals: increased control for best holders to help them accredit their content, access to top quality 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 information library containing public data from a wide variety of sources will likewise be provided to AI researchers.

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

In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that intended to boost 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 now been repealed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do rather, but he is said to desire the AI sector to face less guideline.

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 orcz.com even a comedian.

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

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "reasonable use" and are therefore exempt. There are a number of aspects which can make up reasonable use - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it gathers training information and whether it must be paying for it.

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

DeepSeek claims that it established its technology for a fraction of the cost of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's present supremacy of the sector.

As for me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the moment, if I truly desire a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weakness in generative AI tools for larger jobs. It is full of inaccuracies and hallucinations, and it can be quite hard to check out in parts since it's so long-winded.

But offered how rapidly the tech is progressing, I'm unsure for how long I can stay confident that my substantially slower human writing and editing skills, are better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the most significant advancements in international technology, with analysis from BBC reporters worldwide.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.