For Christmas I got an interesting present from a buddy - my very own "best-selling" book.

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (terrific title) bears my name and my image on its cover, and it has radiant reviews.

Yet it was completely written by AI, with a few easy prompts 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 someplace between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It mimics my chatty design of composing, however it's also a bit recurring, and extremely verbose. It might have surpassed Janet's prompts in looking at data about me.

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

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

There are lots of business 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 offered around 150,000 customised books, primarily in the US, considering that pivoting from assembling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller costs ₤ 26. The firm utilizes its own AI tools to produce them, based on an open source big language model.

I'm not asking you to my book. Actually you can't - only Janet, who created it, wiki.rrtn.org can order any further copies.

There is currently no barrier to anybody creating one in any person's name, including celebrities - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book includes a printed disclaimer stating that it is fictional, developed by AI, and designed "solely to bring humour and joy".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the firm, however Mr Mashiach worries that the product is meant as a "personalised gag gift", and timeoftheworld.date the books do not get offered even more.

He wishes to broaden his variety, generating various genres such as sci-fi, and maybe providing an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted type of customer AI - offering AI-generated items to human clients.

It's likewise 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 expressed alarm about their work being utilized to train generative AI tools that then produce comparable material based upon it.

"We ought to be clear, when we are discussing information here, we in fact mean human creators' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI firms to regard creators' rights.

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

In 2023 a song featuring AI-generated voices of Canadian vocalists Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social networks 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 creator trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were fake, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not think the use of generative AI for innovative functions should be prohibited, but I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without consent must be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be really effective however let's build it ethically and relatively."

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 market and damages America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - consisting of the BBC - have actually selected to obstruct AI developers from trawling their online content 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 permit AI designers to use creators' content on the web to assist 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 locations like defence, health care and logistics without trawling the work of authors, reporters and artists.

"All of these things work without going and changing copyright law and destroying the incomes of the nation'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 developers, 2.4 million jobs and a whole lot of pleasure," says 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 performing industries on the unclear promise of growth."

A government representative said: "No move will be made up until we are absolutely positive we have a useful strategy that delivers each of our goals: increased control for right holders to help them certify their material, access to high-quality material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more transparency for best holders from AI designers."

Under the UK government's new AI plan, a national information library including public information from a vast array of sources will also be made readily 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 boost the safety of AI with, among other things, firms in the sector required to share information of the functions of their systems with the US federal government before they are launched.

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

This comes as a variety of lawsuits against AI firms, and especially against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been gotten by everyone from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and wiki.tld-wars.space even a comic.

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

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "reasonable use" and are for that reason exempt. There are a variety of elements which can make up fair usage - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it collects training information and wiki.lafabriquedelalogistique.fr whether it need to be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek claims that it developed its technology for a portion of the price of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's existing supremacy of the sector.

When it comes to me and a career as an author, I think that at the moment, championsleage.review if I actually want a "bestseller" I'll still have to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the present weak point in generative AI tools for larger projects. It has plenty of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be rather difficult to check out in parts since it's so long-winded.

But given how quickly the tech is evolving, I'm uncertain the length of time I can remain positive that my significantly slower human writing and editing abilities, are much better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest developments in global technology, with analysis from BBC reporters all over the world.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.