For Christmas I received an interesting gift from a good friend - my extremely own "best-selling" book.

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

Yet it was entirely written by AI, with a couple of simple prompts about me supplied by my buddy Janet.

It's an interesting read, and uproarious in parts. But it likewise meanders rather a lot, and is somewhere in between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It simulates my chatty design of writing, but it's likewise a bit repetitive, and really verbose. It may have surpassed Janet's triggers in collating information about me.

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

There's also a strange, repetitive hallucination in the kind of my feline (I have no family pets). And there's a metaphor on almost 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 called the chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had sold around 150,000 personalised books, mainly in the US, since rotating 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 upon an open source large language model.

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

There is presently no barrier to anyone producing one in anybody's name, consisting of celebrities - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around violent content. Each book includes a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is fictional, produced by AI, and designed "exclusively to bring humour and happiness".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the firm, however Mr Mashiach worries that the item is intended as a "personalised gag gift", and the books do not get offered even more.

He wishes to widen his variety, producing different genres such as sci-fi, and possibly offering an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted kind of consumer AI - selling AI-generated items to human consumers.

It's also 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 actors worldwide have revealed alarm about their work being utilized to train generative AI tools that then produce comparable content based upon it.

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

"This is books, this is articles, this is images. It's works of art. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to find out how to do something and then do more like that."

In 2023 a song including AI-generated voices of Canadian vocalists Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social media before being pulled from streaming platforms because it was not their work and yewiki.org they had not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's developer trying to nominate it for a Grammy award. And bphomesteading.com although the artists were phony, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not think the usage of generative AI for creative purposes should be banned, however I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without authorization need to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be really powerful but let's construct it morally and fairly."

OpenAI states 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 damages America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - including the BBC - have actually chosen to block AI designers from trawling their online content for training purposes. Others have chosen to work together - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for instance.

The UK government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would enable AI designers to utilize developers' material on the web to assist establish their models, unless the rights holders choose out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

He explains that AI can make advances in areas like defence, health care and logistics without trawling the work of authors, journalists and .

"All of these things work without going and altering copyright law and messing up the livelihoods of the nation's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, is also strongly versus getting rid of copyright law for AI.

"Creative industries are wealth developers, 2.4 million jobs and an entire lot of happiness," 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 unclear guarantee of development."

A federal government spokesperson said: "No relocation will be made up until we are definitely positive we have a useful plan that provides each of our goals: increased control for best holders to help them accredit their material, access to premium product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more openness for ideal holders from AI designers."

Under the UK government's new AI strategy, a national information library including public data from a broad variety of sources will likewise be provided to AI scientists.

In the US the future of federal guidelines 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 intended to boost the security of AI with, to name a few things, firms 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 repealed by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do instead, but he is stated to want the AI sector to deal with less guideline.

This comes as a variety of suits against AI companies, and particularly versus 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 content from the web without their authorization, and utilized 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 fair use - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it gathers training data and whether it must be paying for it.

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

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

As for me and a profession as an author, I think that at the minute, if I truly want a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the present weak point in generative AI tools for larger projects. It has plenty of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be quite challenging to read in parts due to the fact that it's so verbose.

But given how quickly the tech is evolving, I'm not exactly sure the length of time I can stay positive that my considerably slower human writing and forum.altaycoins.com editing abilities, are much better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the greatest advancements in global innovation, with analysis from BBC correspondents around the globe.

Outside the UK? Register here.