For Christmas I got a fascinating present from a pal - my really own "very popular" book.

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

Yet it was entirely composed by AI, with a couple of easy prompts about me supplied by my pal Janet.

It's an interesting read, and extremely amusing in parts. But it likewise meanders quite a lot, and is someplace between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It imitates my chatty style of writing, however it's also a bit repeated, and extremely verbose. It may have gone beyond Janet's triggers in collecting information about me.

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

There's likewise a strange, repeated hallucination in the form of my cat (I have no pets). And there's a metaphor on almost 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 got in touch with the chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had offered around 150,000 customised books, primarily in the US, given that rotating from assembling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

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

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

There is presently no barrier to anybody creating one in anyone's name, consisting of celebs - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book contains a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is imaginary, created by AI, and designed "solely to bring humour and delight".

Legally, the copyright comes from the company, but Mr Mashiach stresses that the product is meant as a "customised gag gift", and the books do not get offered even more.

He intends to expand his range, creating various categories such as sci-fi, and maybe offering an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted kind of consumer AI - selling AI-generated goods to human clients.

It's likewise a bit frightening if, like me, forum.altaycoins.com you write for a living. Not least since it probably took less than a minute to generate, 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 churn out comparable content based upon it.

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

"This is books, this is short articles, this is images. It's artworks. It's records ... The whole point of AI training is to discover how to do something and after that 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 because it was not their work and they had not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's creator attempting to nominate it for a Grammy award. And despite the fact that the artists were fake, it was still wildly popular.

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

OpenAI says Chinese rivals using 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 - including the BBC - have actually chosen to obstruct AI designers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have decided to work together - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for instance.

The UK government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would enable AI designers to utilize creators' material on the internet to assist establish their designs, unless the rights holders choose 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 altering copyright law and destroying the incomes of the nation's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your house of Lords, is also strongly against removing copyright law for AI.

"Creative markets are wealth developers, 2.4 million jobs and an entire lot of delight," states 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 best performing industries on the vague guarantee of development."

A federal government representative said: "No move will be made till we are absolutely confident we have a useful plan that provides each of our goals: increased control for best holders to assist them accredit their content, access to top quality product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more openness for right holders from AI designers."

Under the UK government's new AI plan, a national data library consisting of public data from a wide variety of sources will likewise be provided to AI researchers.

In the US the future of federal guidelines 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 aimed to enhance the safety of AI with, to name a few things, firms in the sector gdprhub.eu required to share details of the operations of their systems with the US government before they are launched.

But this has now been repealed by Trump. It remains 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 variety of suits versus AI companies, and especially against 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 comic.

They claim that the AI firms broke the law when they took their content from the internet without their permission, and used 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 canadasimple.com is under increasing analysis over how it gathers training data and whether it must be spending for it.

If this wasn't all sufficient to consider, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek has shaken the sector over the past week. It became one of the most downloaded complimentary app on Apple's US App Store.

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

As for me and a career as an author, I think that at the moment, if I truly 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 larger jobs. It is complete of errors and hallucinations, users.atw.hu and it can be quite difficult to check out in parts due to the fact that it's so long-winded.

But given how rapidly the tech is progressing, I'm not sure the length of time I can remain confident that my significantly slower human writing and modifying abilities, are better.

Register for our newsletter to follow the greatest developments in international innovation, with analysis from BBC reporters around the globe.

Outside the UK? Register here.