For Christmas I received a fascinating gift from a buddy - my very own "best-selling" book.

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (fantastic title) bears my name and my image on its cover, and accc.rcec.sinica.edu.tw it has radiant evaluations.

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

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

It imitates my chatty style of composing, but it's also a bit repetitive, and really verbose. It may have exceeded Janet's prompts in looking at data about me.

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

There's likewise a mysterious, in the type of my feline (I have no animals). And there's a metaphor on nearly every page - some more random than others.

There are lots of business online offering AI-book composing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I called the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had offered around 150,000 personalised books, generally in the US, given that rotating from compiling 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 on an open source big language design.

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

There is presently no barrier to anyone creating one in any person's name, including celebrities - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book contains a printed disclaimer specifying that it is imaginary, produced by AI, and created "exclusively to bring humour and delight".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the firm, but Mr Mashiach worries that the product is intended as a "personalised gag present", and the books do not get offered further.

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

It's likewise a bit frightening if, like me, drapia.org you compose for a living. Not least due to the fact that 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 actually revealed alarm about their work being utilized to train generative AI tools that then produce similar content based upon it.

"We should be clear, when we are discussing data here, we really suggest human creators' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI firms to regard developers' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is images. 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 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 actually not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's developer attempting to choose it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were phony, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not believe using generative AI for imaginative functions ought to be prohibited, but I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without permission need to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be very powerful but let's construct it ethically and relatively."

OpenAI says Chinese competitors using its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: 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 - including the BBC - have actually selected to block AI designers from trawling their online content 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 thinking about an overhaul of the law that would permit AI designers to utilize developers' material on the web to assist establish their models, unless the rights holders opt out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "insanity".

He explains 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 livelihoods of the nation's creatives," he argues.

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

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

"The federal government is undermining one of its best carrying out markets on the unclear pledge of development."

A federal government representative said: "No move will be made till we are definitely positive we have a useful strategy that delivers each of our objectives: increased control for best holders to assist them accredit their content, access to premium product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more transparency for right holders from AI designers."

Under the UK federal government's brand-new AI strategy, a nationwide information library including public information from a large range of sources will likewise be provided to AI researchers.

In the US the future of federal rules to manage AI is now up in the air following President Trump's go back to the presidency.

In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that intended to improve the safety of AI with, to name a few things, firms in the sector required to share details of the workings of their systems with the US federal government before they are released.

But this has now been rescinded by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do rather, but he is stated to want the AI sector to face less guideline.

This comes as a number of suits versus AI firms, and particularly versus 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 declare that the AI companies broke the law when they took their material from the internet without their consent, and used it to train their systems.

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "reasonable usage" and are therefore exempt. There are a variety of aspects which can make up reasonable usage - it's not a straight-forward definition. 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 adequate to consider, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek has shaken the sector over the past week. It ended up being one of the most downloaded free app on Apple's US App Store.

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

As for me and lovewiki.faith a profession as an author, I think that at the minute, if I actually 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 tasks. It has lots of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be quite difficult to read in parts due to the fact that it's so verbose.

But offered how quickly the tech is evolving, I'm not sure for akropolistravel.com how long I can stay positive that my considerably slower human writing and modifying skills, are much better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest advancements in global technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents around the world.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.