For Christmas I got an intriguing present from a buddy - my really own "very popular" book.

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

Yet it was totally written by AI, with a few easy prompts about me supplied by my buddy Janet.

It's an interesting read, and uproarious in parts. But it likewise meanders rather a lot, and is somewhere in between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It mimics my chatty style of writing, however it's likewise a bit repetitive, and extremely verbose. It might have exceeded Janet's triggers in looking at information about me.

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

There's likewise a strange, repetitive hallucination in the form of my cat (I have no family pets). And there's a metaphor on nearly every page - some more random than others.

There are dozens of companies online offering AI-book composing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I called the primary executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had offered around 150,000 personalised books, generally in the US, because rotating from compiling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

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

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

There is currently no barrier to anybody creating one in any person's name, including stars - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around violent material. Each book contains a printed disclaimer stating that it is fictional, created by AI, and developed "solely to bring humour and delight".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the company, however Mr Mashiach worries that the product is meant as a "customised gag present", and the books do not get offered further.

He wants to widen his variety, generating various categories such as sci-fi, and perhaps using an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted kind of customer AI - offering AI-generated products to human clients.

It's also a bit terrifying if, bphomesteading.com like me, you compose for a living. Not least due to the fact that it probably took less than a minute to generate, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound similar to me.

Musicians, authors, artists and actors worldwide have actually 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 creators' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI firms to regard creators' rights.

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

In 2023 a tune 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 not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's developer trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were phony, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not think making use of generative AI for imaginative purposes need to be prohibited, however I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without authorization ought to be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be extremely powerful but let's construct it ethically and relatively."

OpenAI states Chinese competitors 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 actually selected to block AI developers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have decided to team up - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for instance.

The UK federal government is considering an overhaul of the law that would allow AI developers to use developers' material on the web to assist develop their models, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "insanity".

He explains that AI can make advances in areas like defence, healthcare and without trawling the work of authors, reporters and artists.

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

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

"Creative markets are wealth creators, 2.4 million jobs and a whole lot of delight," states the Baroness, vmeste-so-vsemi.ru who is likewise an advisor to the Institute for asteroidsathome.net Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The federal government is weakening one of its finest carrying out markets on the unclear pledge of development."

A government spokesperson said: "No move will be made till we are definitely positive we have a practical plan that provides each of our objectives: increased control for best holders to assist them accredit their content, access to top quality product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more openness for best holders from AI developers."

Under the UK government's brand-new AI strategy, a nationwide data library consisting of public data from a vast array of sources will likewise 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 return to the presidency.

In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that aimed to improve the safety of AI with, to name a few things, firms in the sector needed to share information of the operations of their systems with the US federal government before they are launched.

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

This comes as a number of claims versus AI firms, and especially against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been secured by everybody from the New York 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 web without their permission, and utilized it to train their systems.

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

If this wasn't all adequate to ponder, Chinese AI company DeepSeek has shaken the sector over the previous week. It ended up being one of the most downloaded free app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek claims that it developed its innovation for a fraction of the cost of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's existing dominance of the sector.

As for me and surgiteams.com a profession as an author, I believe that at the minute, if I truly want a "bestseller" I'll still have to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the present weakness in generative AI tools for bigger tasks. It has lots of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be rather hard to read in parts because it's so long-winded.

But given how rapidly the tech is developing, I'm not sure for how long I can stay confident that my substantially slower human writing and modifying abilities, are much better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest developments in international innovation, with analysis from BBC reporters worldwide.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.