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

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

Yet it was totally written by AI, with a few basic triggers about me supplied by my good friend Janet.

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

It mimics my chatty style of writing, but it's likewise a bit recurring, and really verbose. It might have gone beyond Janet's prompts in collecting information about me.

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

There's likewise a mysterious, repetitive hallucination in the form of my feline (I have no family pets). And there's a metaphor on almost every page - some more random than others.

There are dozens of business online offering AI-book writing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I got in touch with the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had sold around 150,000 personalised books, mainly in the US, because rotating from putting together 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 create them, based upon an open source large language model.

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

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

Legally, the copyright belongs to the company, but Mr Mashiach worries that the item is intended as a "customised gag gift", and the books do not get sold even more.

He hopes to expand his variety, generating different genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps using an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted type of customer AI - offering AI-generated items to human customers.

It's likewise a bit scary if, engel-und-waisen.de like me, you compose for a living. Not least since it probably 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 expressed alarm about their work being utilized to train generative AI tools that then produce comparable content based upon it.

"We need to be clear, when we are speaking about information here, we in fact suggest human developers' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to respect developers' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is pictures. It's works of art. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to discover how to do something and after that do more like that."

In 2023 a song including AI-generated voices of Canadian singers Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social networks before being pulled from streaming platforms since 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 despite the fact that the artists were fake, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not believe making use of generative AI for creative functions need to be banned, however I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without approval ought to be banned," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be really effective but let's develop it fairly 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 market and damages America's swagger

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

The UK federal government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would enable AI developers to use developers' material on the web to assist establish their designs, unless the rights holders pull 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 altering copyright law and ruining the livelihoods of the country's creatives," he argues.

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

"Creative industries are wealth creators, 2.4 million jobs and a great deal of joy," states the Baroness, who is also an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The federal government is weakening one of its best performing industries on the unclear guarantee of growth."

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

Under the UK federal government's new AI plan, a nationwide information library including public information from a vast array of sources will also be made available to AI scientists.

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 aimed to increase the security of AI with, amongst other things, companies in the sector required to share information of the workings of their systems with the US government before they are released.

But this has actually now been reversed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do rather, but he is stated to desire the AI sector to deal with less policy.

This comes as a number of suits against AI firms, ai and especially against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been gotten by everybody from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.

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

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

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

DeepSeek claims that it developed its technology for a portion of the rate of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security concerns in the US, and threatens American's current supremacy of the sector.

As for me and a profession as an author, experienciacortazar.com.ar I believe that at the moment, if I truly desire 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 bigger tasks. It has plenty of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be rather challenging to read in parts due to the fact that it's so verbose.

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

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

Outside the UK? Register here.