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

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

Yet it was completely written by AI, with a few basic prompts about me supplied by my friend Janet.

It's an intriguing read, and setiathome.berkeley.edu uproarious in parts. But it likewise meanders rather a lot, and is someplace between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It imitates my chatty design of composing, but it's also a bit repeated, and macphersonwiki.mywikis.wiki extremely verbose. It may have exceeded Janet's prompts in collecting information about me.

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

There's likewise a mysterious, repetitive hallucination in the type of my feline (I have no family pets). And there's a metaphor on practically 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 got in touch with the chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had actually offered around 150,000 personalised books, generally in the US, considering that 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 large language model.

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

There is presently no to anybody creating one in anybody's name, consisting of stars - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around violent content. Each book includes a printed disclaimer stating that it is fictional, created by AI, and developed "exclusively to bring humour and joy".

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

He wants to expand his range, producing various categories such as sci-fi, and maybe providing an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted form of consumer AI - offering AI-generated items to human consumers.

It's also 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 create, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound similar to me.

Musicians, authors, historydb.date artists and stars worldwide have actually expressed alarm about their work being used to train generative AI tools that then produce comparable content based upon it.

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

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

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

"I do not believe the use of generative AI for imaginative functions need to be banned, but I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without permission should be banned," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be very effective however let's develop it fairly 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 chosen to obstruct AI developers from trawling their online content for training purposes. Others have actually decided to work together - 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 enable AI designers to use developers' content on the internet to assist establish their designs, unless the rights holders decide out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "insanity".

He mentions that AI can make advances in areas 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 ruining the livelihoods of the nation's creatives," he argues.

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

"Creative industries are wealth creators, 2.4 million tasks and an entire lot of delight," says the Baroness, who is also a consultant to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The federal government is undermining one of its finest carrying out markets on the vague promise of development."

A government representative said: "No relocation will be made until we are definitely positive we have a practical strategy that delivers each of our objectives: increased control for ideal holders to assist them license their content, access to high-quality product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more openness for ideal holders from AI designers."

Under the UK federal government's brand-new AI strategy, a nationwide data library consisting of public data from a wide variety of sources will also be provided to AI scientists.

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

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

This comes as a variety of claims versus AI companies, and particularly against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been secured by everyone from the New york city Times to authors, music labels, and even a comic.

They claim that the AI companies broke the law when they took their content from the web without their permission, and used it to train their systems.

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "fair usage" and are for that reason exempt. There are a variety of aspects which can constitute 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 must be spending for it.

If this wasn't all sufficient to consider, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek has actually 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 established its innovation for a portion of the price of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has raised security concerns 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 moment, if I actually desire a "bestseller" I'll still have to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the present weak point in generative AI tools for larger projects. It is complete of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be rather tough to read in parts since it's so verbose.

But given how rapidly the tech is developing, I'm not exactly sure the length of time I can stay confident that my significantly slower human writing and modifying skills, are better.

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

Outside the UK? Register here.