For Christmas I received a fascinating present from a pal - my extremely own "very popular" book.

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (excellent title) bears my name and surgiteams.com my photo on its cover, and it has radiant reviews.

Yet it was entirely written by AI, with a few easy prompts about me supplied by my buddy Janet.

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

It mimics my chatty design of composing, but it's likewise a bit repeated, and really verbose. It may have gone beyond in looking at data about me.

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

There's also a strange, repeated hallucination in the form 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 companies online offering AI-book writing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I contacted the primary executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had actually offered around 150,000 customised books, mainly in the US, given that rotating from putting together AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller costs ₤ 26. The company uses its own AI tools to generate 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 further copies.

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

Legally, the copyright comes from the firm, but Mr Mashiach worries that the product is intended as a "personalised gag gift", and the books do not get sold further.

He wants to expand his range, creating various categories such as sci-fi, and possibly offering an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted type of customer AI - offering AI-generated items to human consumers.

It's also a bit scary if, like me, you compose for a living. Not least because it probably took less than a minute to create, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound much like me.

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

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

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

In 2023 a song including AI-generated voices of Canadian singers Drake and morphomics.science The Weeknd went viral on social media before being pulled from streaming platforms due to the fact that it was not their work and they had not granted it. It didn't stop the track's creator attempting to nominate it for a Grammy award. And despite the fact that the artists were phony, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not believe using generative AI for imaginative purposes ought to be prohibited, but I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without authorization ought to be banned," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be very powerful however let's construct it ethically and relatively."

OpenAI states Chinese competitors utilizing its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

China's DeepSeek AI shakes market and dents America's swagger

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

The UK federal government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would enable AI developers to utilize developers' content on the internet to help develop their models, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

He mentions that AI can make advances in locations like defence, healthcare and logistics without trawling the work of authors, journalists and artists.

"All of these things work without going and altering copyright law and messing up the incomes of the country's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in the House of Lords, is likewise strongly versus getting rid of copyright law for AI.

"Creative industries are wealth creators, 2.4 million jobs and a lot of happiness," states 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 carrying out industries on the unclear pledge of development."

A federal government spokesperson stated: "No move will be made until we are absolutely confident we have a practical plan that delivers each of our goals: increased control for ideal holders to assist them certify their material, access to high-quality product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more transparency for ideal holders from AI developers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI strategy, a national data library containing public information from a vast array of sources will likewise be made readily available to AI scientists.

In the US the future of federal rules to manage AI is now up in the air following President Trump's go back to the presidency.

In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that aimed 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 released.

But this has actually now been rescinded by Trump. It stays 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 suits against AI companies, and particularly 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 claim that the AI companies broke the law when they took their material from the internet without their permission, and utahsyardsale.com used it to train their systems.

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "reasonable usage" and are therefore exempt. There are a number of aspects which can make up fair usage - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it collects training information and whether it need to be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek claims that it developed its innovation for a portion of the price of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has raised security concerns in the US, and threatens American's present supremacy of the sector.

When it comes to me and a profession as an author, archmageriseswiki.com I believe that at the moment, if I truly desire a "bestseller" I'll still need to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weakness in generative AI tools for larger jobs. It is full of inaccuracies and hallucinations, systemcheck-wiki.de and it can be quite tough to read in parts since it's so verbose.

But given how rapidly the tech is evolving, I'm uncertain for how long I can stay confident that my significantly slower human writing and modifying skills, are better.

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

Outside the UK? Sign up here.