For Christmas I received an intriguing gift from a good 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 totally written by AI, with a few basic prompts about me provided by my friend Janet.

It's a fascinating read, and extremely amusing in parts. But it also meanders quite 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 likewise a bit recurring, and very verbose. It might have exceeded Janet's prompts in collating information about me.

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

There's also a mysterious, repeated hallucination in the type of my cat (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 writing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I got in touch with the president Adir Mashiach, asteroidsathome.net based in Israel, he informed me he had actually sold around 150,000 customised books, generally in the US, given that 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 uses its own AI tools to generate them, based on an open source big language design.

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

There is currently no barrier to anybody one in any person's name, including celebrities - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around violent content. Each book contains a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is imaginary, created by AI, and developed "exclusively to bring humour and joy".

Legally, the copyright comes from the company, however Mr Mashiach worries that the product is meant as a "personalised gag present", and the books do not get offered further.

He intends to expand his variety, generating various categories such as sci-fi, and maybe using an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted kind of customer AI - offering AI-generated products to human consumers.

It's also a bit scary if, like me, you write for botdb.win a living. Not least due to the fact that it most likely took less than a minute to create, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound similar to me.

Musicians, authors, artists and stars worldwide have actually expressed alarm about their work being utilized to train generative AI tools that then produce comparable material based upon it.

"We ought to be clear, when we are talking about information here, we really suggest human developers' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, photorum.eclat-mauve.fr which campaigns for AI companies to respect developers' rights.

"This is books, this is short articles, this is pictures. It's artworks. It's records ... The whole point of AI training is to discover 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 due to the fact that it was not their work and they had not granted it. It didn't stop the track's creator trying to nominate it for a Grammy award. And although the artists were phony, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not think using generative AI for innovative purposes ought to be prohibited, but I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without permission ought to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be really effective however let's develop it fairly and fairly."

OpenAI states Chinese competitors utilizing its work for addsub.wiki their AI apps

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

China's DeepSeek AI shakes market and damages America's swagger

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

The UK federal government is considering an overhaul of the law that would allow AI developers to utilize creators' content on the web to help establish their models, unless the rights holders opt out.

Ed Newton Rex explains 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 changing copyright law and destroying the livelihoods of the country's creatives," he argues.

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

"Creative markets are wealth developers, 2.4 million jobs and a great deal of pleasure," says the Baroness, who is likewise a consultant to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

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

A government spokesperson stated: "No relocation will be made until we are absolutely positive we have a useful plan that provides each of our objectives: increased control for best holders to help them certify their material, access to high-quality material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more transparency for best holders from AI designers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI plan, a nationwide information library consisting of public information from a wide variety of sources will also be offered to AI researchers.

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 improve the safety of AI with, to name a few things, companies in the sector needed to share information of the operations of their systems with the US government before they are released.

But this has actually now been repealed by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do instead, but he is said to desire 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 Times to authors, music labels, and even a comic.

They declare that the AI companies broke the law when they took their content from the web without their approval, and utilized it to train their systems.

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "reasonable use" and are for pyra-handheld.com that reason exempt. There are a variety of aspects which can make up fair usage - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it collects training information and whether it must be paying for it.

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

DeepSeek declares that it developed its innovation for a portion of the rate of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security concerns in the US, and threatens American's existing supremacy of the sector.

When it comes to me and a career as an author, I think that at the moment, if I really desire a "bestseller" I'll still have to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weakness in generative AI tools for larger jobs. It has lots of errors and ratemywifey.com hallucinations, and it can be quite hard to read in parts because it's so long-winded.

But provided how rapidly the tech is evolving, I'm not exactly sure for how long I can remain positive that my considerably slower human writing and modifying abilities, are much better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the greatest developments in worldwide technology, with analysis from BBC reporters worldwide.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.