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

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

Yet it was totally written by AI, with a few easy prompts about me provided by my pal Janet.

It's an interesting read, and very funny in parts. But it also meanders quite a lot, and is somewhere in between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It simulates my chatty design of writing, however it's also a bit repeated, and very verbose. It may have gone beyond Janet's prompts in collecting data about me.

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

There's likewise a mysterious, repetitive hallucination in the type of my cat (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 composing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I contacted the chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had actually offered around 150,000 personalised books, mainly in the US, menwiki.men since pivoting 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 utilizes its own AI tools to produce them, based on an open source large language model.

I'm not asking you to buy my book. Actually you can't - only Janet, who created it, can buy any more copies.

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

Legally, the copyright belongs to the firm, however Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is planned as a "customised gag present", and the books do not get offered further.

He hopes to widen his range, generating different categories such as sci-fi, and dokuwiki.stream maybe offering an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted type of consumer AI - offering AI-generated goods to human consumers.

It's likewise a bit scary if, like me, you compose for a living. Not least because it probably took less than a minute to generate, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound much like 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 should be clear, when we are talking about information here, we actually suggest human developers' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI companies to regard creators' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is photos. It's artworks. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to discover how to do something and after that do more like that."

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

"I do not believe using generative AI for innovative purposes should be banned, however I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without authorization must be banned," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be very powerful however let's build it fairly and fairly."

OpenAI states Chinese rivals utilizing 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 - the BBC - have picked to obstruct AI designers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have decided to collaborate - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for example.

The UK federal government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would permit AI designers to utilize developers' material on the internet to help develop their designs, unless the rights holders decide out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

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 altering copyright law and ruining the livelihoods of the country's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your house of Lords, is also highly versus eliminating copyright law for AI.

"Creative markets are wealth creators, 2.4 million jobs and a lot of joy," states the Baroness, wiki.snooze-hotelsoftware.de who is likewise a consultant to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The federal government is weakening among its best performing industries on the vague promise of development."

A federal government representative said: "No move will be made till we are absolutely confident we have a practical plan that provides each of our goals: increased control for best holders to assist them license their material, access to premium material to train leading AI models in the UK, and more transparency for ideal holders from AI developers."

Under the UK federal government's brand-new AI strategy, a national information library including public information from a vast array of sources will likewise be offered to AI scientists.

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

In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that intended to boost the security of AI with, among other things, companies in the sector required to share information of the functions 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 rather, however he is said to desire the AI sector to face less policy.

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

They claim that the AI firms broke the law when they took their material from the internet without their consent, and used it to train their systems.

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "fair usage" and wiki.myamens.com are therefore exempt. There are a number of elements which can make up fair usage - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it gathers training data and whether it need to be spending for it.

If this wasn't all adequate to ponder, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek has actually shaken the sector over the past week. It became the many downloaded totally free app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek declares that it established its innovation for a portion of the cost 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, I believe that at the moment, if I actually desire a "bestseller" I'll still have to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weak point in generative AI tools for larger jobs. It is full of mistakes and hallucinations, asteroidsathome.net and it can be rather hard to read in parts because it's so long-winded.

But given how rapidly the tech is evolving, I'm uncertain how long I can remain positive that my considerably slower human writing and modifying abilities, are better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the most significant developments in worldwide technology, with analysis from BBC reporters all over the world.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.