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

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

Yet it was completely written by AI, with a couple of easy triggers about me provided by my friend Janet.

It's a fascinating read, and extremely funny 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 style of writing, however it's likewise a bit repetitive, and extremely verbose. It may have exceeded Janet's prompts in collecting data about me.

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

There's also a mysterious, repetitive hallucination in the form of my cat (I have no pets). And there's a metaphor on practically every page - some more random than others.

There are dozens of companies online offering AI-book composing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I called the primary executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had offered around 150,000 customised books, primarily in the US, because rotating from putting together 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 upon an open source big language design.

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

There is currently no barrier to anybody producing one in any person's name, including stars - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around violent material. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is fictional, produced by AI, and developed "exclusively to bring humour and pleasure".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the company, however Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is intended as a "personalised gag gift", and the books do not get sold further.

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

It's likewise a bit terrifying if, like me, you write for a living. Not least due to the fact that it most likely took less than a minute to produce, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound much like me.

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

"We should be clear, when we are speaking about information here, we in fact imply human creators' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI companies to respect creators' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is photos. It's works of art. 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 song 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 developer attempting to nominate it for a Grammy award. And despite the fact that the artists were fake, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not think using generative AI for innovative functions ought to be banned, however I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without authorization ought to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be really powerful however let's develop it ethically and fairly."

OpenAI says Chinese rivals its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: championsleage.review 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 - including the BBC - have actually picked to obstruct AI designers from trawling their online material for training purposes. Others have decided to work together - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for example.

The UK government is considering an overhaul of the law that would enable AI designers to use creators' content on the web to help develop their designs, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "insanity".

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 altering copyright law and destroying the incomes of the country's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, is likewise highly versus removing copyright law for AI.

"Creative industries are wealth creators, 2.4 million tasks and a great deal of pleasure," states the Baroness, who is also an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The federal government is weakening among its finest carrying out industries on the vague pledge of growth."

A federal government representative stated: "No relocation will be made up until we are absolutely confident we have a useful strategy that provides each of our goals: increased control for right holders to assist them accredit their content, access to high-quality product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more openness for best holders from AI developers."

Under the UK government's new AI strategy, a nationwide data library consisting of public data from a vast array 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 security of AI with, to name a few things, companies in the sector needed to share details of the operations of their systems with the US government before they are released.

But this has actually now been reversed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do rather, however he is said to want the AI sector to deal with less policy.

This comes as a number of suits versus AI firms, and particularly versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been secured by everyone from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.

They declare that the AI companies 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 usage" and are for that reason exempt. There are a variety of aspects which can constitute reasonable usage - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it gathers training data and whether it should be paying for it.

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

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

As for me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the moment, if I actually 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 bigger tasks. It has lots of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be quite tough to check out in parts because it's so verbose.

But given how quickly the tech is evolving, I'm not exactly sure for akropolistravel.com how long I can remain confident that my considerably slower human writing and asystechnik.com editing skills, are much better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest developments in worldwide technology, with analysis from BBC reporters worldwide.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.