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

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

Yet it was completely written by AI, with a few simple triggers about me supplied by my friend Janet.

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

It imitates my chatty style of writing, but it's also a bit repetitive, and really verbose. It may have gone beyond Janet's triggers in collating data about me.

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

There's also a mystical, repetitive hallucination in the kind of my feline (I have no 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 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, considering that pivoting from compiling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

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

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

There is currently no barrier to anyone creating one in anyone's name, including celebs - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around . Each book contains a printed disclaimer specifying that it is fictional, developed by AI, and designed "exclusively to bring humour and happiness".

Legally, the copyright comes from the firm, but Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is intended as a "customised gag gift", and the books do not get offered further.

He wants to widen his range, generating different categories such as sci-fi, and maybe using an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted form of customer AI - selling AI-generated items to human consumers.

It's likewise a bit terrifying if, like me, you compose for a living. Not least since it most likely took less than a minute to create, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound much like me.

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

"We must be clear, when we are discussing data here, we actually indicate human creators' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI companies to regard developers' rights.

"This is books, this is articles, this is images. It's masterpieces. 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 tune including AI-generated voices of Canadian vocalists Drake and 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 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 fake, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not believe the use of generative AI for innovative purposes need to be prohibited, but I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without authorization need to be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be extremely powerful however let's construct it morally and relatively."

OpenAI states Chinese competitors 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 - including the BBC - have actually picked to block AI developers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have actually chosen to collaborate - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for instance.

The UK federal government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would allow AI designers to utilize creators' material on the web to assist develop their models, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

He points out that AI can make advances in locations like defence, health care 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 livelihoods of the nation's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in the House of Lords, is also strongly against eliminating copyright law for AI.

"Creative industries are wealth creators, 2.4 million jobs and an entire lot of delight," says the Baroness, who is also an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

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

A government representative stated: "No move will be made till we are definitely positive we have a practical plan that provides each of our objectives: increased control for ideal holders to help them license their content, access to premium product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more transparency for ideal holders from AI developers."

Under the UK government's brand-new AI strategy, a nationwide information library containing public data from a large range of sources will also 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 return to the presidency.

In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that intended to enhance the safety of AI with, among other things, companies in the sector needed to share details of the workings of their systems with the US federal government before they are released.

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

This comes as a number of suits versus AI firms, and particularly against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been taken out by everybody from the New york city Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.

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

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "reasonable use" and are for that reason exempt. There are a number of aspects which can constitute reasonable use - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it collects training data and whether it ought to be paying for it.

If this wasn't all adequate to consider, Chinese AI company DeepSeek has shaken the sector over the previous week. It ended up being the a lot of downloaded complimentary app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek claims that it established its technology for a fraction of the price of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's existing dominance of the sector.

As for me and a profession as an author, fishtanklive.wiki I believe that at the moment, if I truly want a "bestseller" I'll still have to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weak point in generative AI tools for larger jobs. It has plenty of errors and hallucinations, and it can be quite difficult to check out in parts since it's so verbose.

But provided how rapidly the tech is progressing, I'm uncertain for how long I can stay positive that my considerably slower human writing and editing abilities, are better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the greatest advancements in global innovation, with analysis from BBC reporters all over the world.

Outside the UK? Register here.