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

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

Yet it was entirely composed by AI, with a couple of simple prompts about me provided by my buddy Janet.

It's an intriguing read, and very amusing 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 writing, however it's likewise a bit repeated, and really verbose. It may have gone beyond Janet's prompts in collecting data about me.

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

There's also a strange, repeated hallucination in the kind of my cat (I have no family pets). And there's a metaphor on nearly 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 called the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had actually offered around 150,000 customised books, primarily in the US, since pivoting from assembling 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 produce them, based on an open source large language model.

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

There is presently no barrier to anyone developing one in anyone's name, including celebs - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book contains a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is fictional, produced by AI, and created "exclusively to bring humour and happiness".

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

He wants to broaden his variety, generating different genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps providing an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted kind of customer AI - selling AI-generated items to human clients.

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

Musicians, oke.zone authors, artists and stars worldwide have actually revealed alarm about their work being utilized to train generative AI tools that then churn out comparable content based upon it.

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

"This is books, this is short articles, this is photos. It's artworks. 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 singers 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 granted it. It didn't stop the track's developer attempting to nominate it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were fake, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not think making use of generative AI for imaginative functions must be banned, however I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without approval need to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be really effective but let's develop it fairly and fairly."

OpenAI states Chinese competitors using 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 chosen to block AI designers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have decided to work together - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for example.

The UK federal government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would permit AI developers to utilize developers' content on the internet to assist establish their designs, unless the rights holders choose out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

He mentions that AI can make advances in areas like defence, health care and logistics without trawling the work of authors, reporters and artists.

"All of these things work without going and altering copyright law and ruining the livelihoods of the nation's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your house 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 pleasure," says the Baroness, who is likewise an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The federal government is weakening one of its best performing markets on the vague pledge of growth."

A federal government representative stated: "No move will be made up until we are definitely positive we have a practical plan that delivers each of our goals: increased control for right holders to help them certify their material, access to top quality product to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more openness for best holders from AI designers."

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

In the US the future of federal guidelines to manage 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 increase the security of AI with, to name a few things, firms in the sector required to share information of the operations of their systems with the US federal government before they are released.

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

This comes as a number of suits against AI companies, and especially versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been gotten by everyone from the New york city Times to authors, music labels, and even a comic.

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

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "reasonable use" and are therefore exempt. There are a number of factors which can constitute reasonable use - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it collects training data and whether it should be spending 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 complimentary app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek declares that it developed its technology for wiki.dulovic.tech a fraction of the cost 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 profession as an author, I believe that at the minute, if I truly want a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weak point in generative AI tools for larger projects. It has plenty of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be quite tough to check out in parts since it's so verbose.

But provided how quickly the tech is evolving, I'm not exactly sure for bphomesteading.com how long I can stay positive that my significantly slower human writing and editing skills, are much better.

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

Outside the UK? Sign up here.