For Christmas I got an intriguing gift from a friend - my really own "best-selling" book.

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

Yet it was totally written by AI, with a couple of basic triggers about me provided by my good friend Janet.

It's an intriguing read, asteroidsathome.net and really funny in parts. But it likewise meanders rather a lot, and is someplace in between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It mimics my chatty design of composing, but it's also a bit repetitive, and very verbose. It might have gone beyond Janet's prompts in collecting information about me.

Several sentences begin "as a leading technology reporter ..." - cringe - which could 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 almost 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 called the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had sold around 150,000 personalised books, primarily in the US, since 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 firm uses its own AI tools to create them, based upon an open source large language design.

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

There is presently no barrier to anybody creating one in any person's name, including celebs - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around violent material. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer stating that it is fictional, created by AI, and created "entirely to bring humour and pleasure".

Legally, the copyright comes from the firm, however Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is intended as a "customised gag present", and the books do not get sold even more.

He intends to broaden his range, generating different genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps providing an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted type of consumer AI - offering AI-generated products to human clients.

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

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

"We must be clear, when we are speaking about information here, we actually indicate human developers' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI firms to regard creators' rights.

"This is books, this is articles, this is images. It's masterpieces. It's records ... The whole point of AI training is to discover how to do something and then do more like that."

In 2023 a tune 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 actually not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's creator attempting to nominate it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were phony, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not believe the usage of generative AI for creative functions ought to be banned, however I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without consent need to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be very effective but let's develop it morally 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 market 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 functions. Others have chosen to collaborate - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for instance.

The UK government is considering an of the law that would enable AI developers to use creators' material on the web to assist develop their models, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

He explains that AI can make advances in areas like defence, healthcare and logistics without trawling the work of authors, journalists 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 markets are wealth developers, 2.4 million tasks and a great deal 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 industries on the unclear guarantee of growth."

A federal government representative stated: "No move will be made until we are definitely positive we have a practical plan that provides each of our goals: increased control for right holders to assist them certify their content, access to top quality product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more transparency for right holders from AI developers."

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

In the US the future of federal guidelines 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 boost the security of AI with, to name a few things, companies in the sector required to share information of the operations 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 rather, however he is said to want the AI sector to face less policy.

This comes as a number of suits versus AI companies, menwiki.men and especially versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been gotten by everyone from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.

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

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "fair use" and are for that reason exempt. There are a variety of aspects which can make up fair usage - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing analysis over how it gathers training information and whether it must be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek claims that it developed its innovation for a fraction of the cost of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security concerns in the US, and threatens American's existing supremacy of the sector.

When it comes to me and a career as an author, I believe that at the moment, if I really want a "bestseller" I'll still need to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weak point in generative AI tools for bigger projects. It has lots of errors and hallucinations, and it can be rather difficult to check out in parts due to the fact that it's so verbose.

But offered how quickly the tech is progressing, kenpoguy.com I'm unsure the length of time I can stay positive that my substantially slower human writing and editing abilities, opentx.cz are better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest advancements in international technology, with analysis from BBC reporters around the globe.

Outside the UK? Register here.