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

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

Yet it was totally written by AI, with a couple of easy prompts 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 in between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It mimics my chatty design of writing, however it's also a bit repetitive, and extremely verbose. It may have gone beyond Janet's triggers in looking at information about me.

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

There's also a strange, repetitive hallucination in the type of my feline (I have no family pets). And there's a metaphor on nearly 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 called the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had sold around 150,000 customised books, primarily in the US, since rotating from compiling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long ₤ 26. The firm utilizes its own AI tools to produce them, based on an open source big language design.

I'm not asking you to purchase my book. Actually you can't - just Janet, who created it, iuridictum.pecina.cz can order any more copies.

There is presently no barrier to anyone creating one in anyone's name, including stars - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is imaginary, created by AI, and developed "entirely to bring humour and delight".

Legally, forum.pinoo.com.tr the copyright belongs to the company, however Mr Mashiach worries that the product is planned as a "customised gag gift", and the books do not get sold even more.

He wants to widen his range, creating different categories such as sci-fi, and possibly offering an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted kind of consumer AI - offering AI-generated products to human consumers.

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

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

"We ought to be clear, when we are speaking about data here, we really mean human creators' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI firms to respect creators' rights.

"This is books, this is short articles, this is pictures. It's masterpieces. 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 featuring AI-generated voices of Canadian vocalists Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social networks before being pulled from streaming platforms because it was not their work and they had actually not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's developer trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were phony, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not believe using generative AI for creative purposes ought to be banned, however I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without approval need to be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be very effective however let's develop it fairly and relatively."

OpenAI says 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 selected to obstruct AI designers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have actually chosen to collaborate - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for instance.

The UK government is considering an overhaul of the law that would allow AI developers to utilize developers' material on the web to help develop their designs, unless the rights holders opt out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

He explains 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 changing copyright law and ruining the incomes of the nation's creatives," he argues.

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

"Creative industries are wealth developers, 2.4 million tasks and a great deal of delight," says the Baroness, who is likewise a consultant to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The government is undermining one of its best performing industries on the vague pledge of development."

A government representative stated: "No relocation will be made till we are absolutely positive we have a useful plan that delivers each of our goals: increased control for right holders to help them certify their content, access to high-quality product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more transparency for best holders from AI developers."

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

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 improve the safety of AI with, to name a few things, companies in the sector needed to share information of the operations of their systems with the US government before they are released.

But this has now been reversed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do rather, but he is stated to want the AI sector to face less policy.

This comes as a variety of lawsuits versus AI companies, and especially versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been taken out by everybody from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.

They claim 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 companies argue that their actions fall under "fair usage" and are for that reason exempt. There are a number of factors which can constitute fair usage - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it gathers training information and whether it should be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek declares that it developed its innovation for a fraction of the rate of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's current supremacy of the sector.

When it comes to me and a career as an author, I believe that at the moment, if I really desire a "bestseller" I'll still need to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the present weakness in generative AI tools for larger tasks. It is complete of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be rather hard to check out in parts because it's so verbose.

But given how quickly the tech is developing, I'm unsure for how long I can stay positive that my considerably slower human writing and modifying abilities, are better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest advancements in worldwide technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents worldwide.

Outside the UK? Register here.