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

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (fantastic 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 easy triggers about me supplied by my pal Janet.

It's an intriguing read, 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 simulates my chatty design of writing, but it's likewise a bit recurring, and very verbose. It might have gone beyond Janet's prompts in looking at data about me.

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

There's likewise a mysterious, repeated hallucination in the type of my feline (I have no pets). 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 called the chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, trade-britanica.trade he informed me he had actually sold around 150,000 personalised books, primarily 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 company uses its own AI tools to create them, based on an open source big language model.

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

There is currently no barrier to anyone developing one in anybody's name, including celebrities - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer stating that it is imaginary, developed by AI, and created "solely to bring humour and happiness".

Legally, the copyright comes from the company, but Mr Mashiach worries that the item is planned as a "customised gag present", and the books do not get offered even more.

He wants to broaden his variety, creating different genres such as sci-fi, and possibly providing an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted form of consumer AI - selling AI-generated products to human clients.

It's likewise a bit terrifying if, like me, you compose for a living. Not least due to the fact that it most likely took less than a minute to produce, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound simply like me.

Musicians, authors, artists and actors worldwide have expressed 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 discussing data here, we actually mean human developers' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI firms to regard creators' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is pictures. It's artworks. 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 featuring AI-generated voices of Canadian singers Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social media before being pulled from streaming platforms because it was not their work and they had actually not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's creator attempting to nominate it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were phony, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not believe using generative AI for imaginative functions must be banned, but I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without permission should be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be extremely effective however let's build it fairly and relatively."

OpenAI says 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 - including the BBC - have actually picked to block AI designers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have actually chosen to collaborate - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for example.

The UK federal government is considering an overhaul of the law that would allow AI developers to utilize creators' material on the internet to help develop their models, unless the rights holders pull 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 livelihoods of the nation's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, is likewise highly against getting rid of copyright law for AI.

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

"The federal government is undermining among its best performing markets on the vague guarantee of growth."

A federal government representative said: "No relocation will be made till we are definitely confident we have a practical plan that provides each of our goals: 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 transparency for best holders from AI designers."

Under the UK government's brand-new AI strategy, a nationwide information library consisting of public data from a large range of sources will likewise be provided to AI .

In the US the future of federal rules 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 enhance the security of AI with, among other things, firms in the sector required to share details of the operations of their systems with the US government before they are launched.

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

This comes as a variety of claims against AI companies, and particularly versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been secured by everyone from the New York Times to authors, oke.zone 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 authorization, and used it to train their systems.

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "reasonable usage" and are therefore exempt. There are a variety of elements which can constitute reasonable use - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing analysis over how it gathers training data and whether it should be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek declares that it developed its technology for equipifieds.com a portion of the cost of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, wiki-tb-service.com and threatens American's current dominance of the sector.

As for me and a profession as an author, I think that at the minute, if I truly desire a "bestseller" I'll still have to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weak point in generative AI tools for bigger tasks. It is complete of errors and hallucinations, and it can be rather challenging to check out in parts since it's so verbose.

But provided how rapidly the tech is progressing, I'm not sure for bytes-the-dust.com how long I can stay positive that my considerably slower human writing and modifying skills, are better.

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

Outside the UK? Sign up here.