For Christmas I received an interesting present from a good friend - my really own "best-selling" book.

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

Yet it was completely written by AI, with a couple of simple triggers about me provided by my buddy Janet.

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

It mimics my chatty design of composing, asteroidsathome.net but it's likewise a bit repeated, and really verbose. It might have surpassed Janet's prompts in looking at data about me.

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

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

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

When I contacted the chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually offered around 150,000 customised books, generally in the US, because rotating from assembling 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 produce them, based upon an open source big language design.

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

There is currently no barrier to anybody producing one in any person's name, including celebrities - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around violent content. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is fictional, created by AI, and created "solely to bring humour and joy".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the company, however Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is meant as a "customised gag present", and the books do not get sold even more.

He hopes to broaden his variety, generating different categories such as sci-fi, and perhaps using an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted type of customer AI - selling AI-generated goods to human clients.

It's also a bit scary if, like me, you write for a living. Not least because it most likely took less than a minute to generate, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound similar to me.

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

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

"This is books, this is articles, 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 after that do more like that."

In 2023 a tune including AI-generated voices of Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social networks before being pulled from streaming platforms because it was not their work and they had not granted it. It didn't stop the track's creator trying to choose it for suvenir51.ru a Grammy award. And although the artists were fake, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not believe making use of generative AI for creative functions ought to be prohibited, however I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without permission must be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be very effective but let's construct 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 industry and dents America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - consisting of the BBC - have picked to block AI designers from trawling their online material for training purposes. Others have actually decided to team up - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for example.

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

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

He explains that AI can make advances in locations like defence, healthcare 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 country's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your house of Lords, is also highly versus removing copyright law for AI.

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

"The federal government is weakening among its finest performing markets on the unclear pledge of growth."

A government spokesperson said: "No relocation will be made until we are absolutely positive we have a useful plan that provides each of our objectives: increased control for ideal holders to help them license their content, 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 federal government's new AI strategy, a nationwide information library consisting of public information from a wide variety of sources will also be offered to AI scientists.

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 boost the security of AI with, to name a few things, firms in the sector needed to share details of the operations of their systems with the US government before they are released.

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

This comes as a number of claims versus AI companies, and especially against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been secured by everybody from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comic.

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

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "reasonable use" and are for that reason exempt. There are a number of factors which can make up reasonable usage - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it collects training data and whether it ought to be paying for it.

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

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

As for me and a profession as an author, I think that at the minute, if I truly 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 bigger projects. It has plenty of inaccuracies and akropolistravel.com hallucinations, and ai it can be quite challenging to read in parts because it's so verbose.

But given how quickly the tech is developing, addsub.wiki I'm not sure for how long I can remain confident that my considerably slower human writing and modifying abilities, are better.

Sign up 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.