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

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

Yet it was entirely written by AI, with a few simple prompts about me provided by my good friend Janet.

It's an interesting read, and extremely funny 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 style of composing, however it's likewise a bit repetitive, and very verbose. It may have exceeded Janet's prompts in collecting information about me.

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

There's likewise a mystical, repeated 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 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 actually offered around 150,000 customised books, mainly in the US, considering that pivoting from assembling 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 large language model.

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

There is presently no barrier to anyone creating one in anyone's name, consisting of stars - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is fictional, created by AI, and designed "entirely to bring humour and pleasure".

Legally, the copyright comes from the firm, but Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is meant as a "personalised gag present", and the books do not get sold even more.

He wants to broaden his range, producing different genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps providing an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted kind of consumer AI - selling AI-generated products to human customers.

It's likewise a bit scary if, like me, classihub.in you write for a living. Not least due to the fact that it most likely 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 expressed 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 data here, we really mean human creators' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI companies to respect developers' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is pictures. It's masterpieces. 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 tune 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 they had not granted it. It didn't stop the track's creator attempting to choose it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were phony, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not believe using generative AI for imaginative purposes must be banned, but I do think that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without consent must be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be extremely effective but let's build it morally and relatively."

OpenAI says Chinese competitors utilizing its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: canadasimple.com 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 - consisting of the BBC - have picked to block AI designers from trawling their online content for training purposes. Others have actually decided to collaborate - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for example.

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

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "insanity".

He mentions 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 messing up the incomes of the country's creatives," he argues.

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

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

"The government is weakening among its finest carrying out industries on the unclear promise of growth."

A government spokesperson said: "No move will be made till we are definitely confident we have a useful strategy that provides each of our goals: increased control for right holders to help them license their material, access to premium product to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more transparency for best holders from AI designers."

Under the UK federal government's brand-new AI strategy, a national data library consisting of public information from a large range of sources will likewise be made offered to AI researchers.

In the US the future of federal rules 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 improve the security of AI with, among other things, firms in the sector needed to share information of the operations of their systems with the US government before they are launched.

But this has actually now been rescinded by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do rather, but he is said to desire the AI sector to face less regulation.

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

They declare that the AI companies broke the law when they took their material from the internet without their permission, and utilized it to train their systems.

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "fair use" and are for that reason exempt. There are a number of factors which can make up fair use - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it gathers training information and whether it must be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek claims that it developed its technology for a portion of the rate of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, and existing supremacy of the sector.

As for me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the minute, if I really desire a "bestseller" I'll still need to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weak point in generative AI tools for larger projects. It has lots of errors and hallucinations, and it can be quite hard to check out in parts due to the fact that it's so verbose.

But given how quickly the tech is evolving, I'm unsure the length of time I can stay confident that my significantly slower human writing and modifying skills, are much better.

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

Outside the UK? Register here.