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

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (terrific title) bears my name and my image on its cover, annunciogratis.net and it has radiant reviews.

Yet it was completely written by AI, with a couple of basic triggers about me supplied by my pal Janet.

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

It simulates my chatty style of writing, however it's also a bit recurring, and really verbose. It may have gone beyond Janet's triggers in collecting data about me.

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

There's likewise a mystical, repeated hallucination in the type of my feline (I have no family pets). And there's a metaphor on practically 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 contacted the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had offered around 150,000 customised books, users.atw.hu generally 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 costs ₤ 26. The company uses its own AI tools to produce them, based on an open source large language model.

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

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

Legally, the copyright comes from the company, however Mr Mashiach worries that the item is planned as a "customised gag present", and the books do not get further.

He wants to broaden his variety, producing different categories such as sci-fi, and maybe using an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted form of consumer AI - selling AI-generated goods to human consumers.

It's also a bit frightening if, forum.batman.gainedge.org like me, you write for a living. Not least because it probably took less than a minute to create, 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 used to train generative AI tools that then produce similar content based upon it.

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

"This is books, this is short articles, this is photos. It's artworks. 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 featuring AI-generated voices of Canadian singers Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social media 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 choose it for a Grammy award. And wolvesbaneuo.com despite the fact that the artists were fake, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not believe making use of generative AI for innovative purposes ought to be banned, however I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without authorization ought to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be really powerful but let's build it ethically and fairly."

OpenAI states Chinese rivals utilizing its work for bryggeriklubben.se 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 - consisting of the BBC - have actually chosen to block AI designers from trawling their online content for training purposes. Others have actually decided to work together - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for example.

The UK government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would allow AI designers to use creators' content on the internet to help establish their models, unless the rights holders decide out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

He mentions that AI can make advances in locations 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 nation's creatives," he argues.

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

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

"The government is weakening one of its best carrying out industries on the vague guarantee of growth."

A government spokesperson said: "No move will be made till we are definitely positive we have a useful strategy that delivers each of our goals: increased control for ideal holders to help them accredit their material, access to high-quality product to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more transparency for ideal holders from AI designers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI plan, a nationwide information library including public data from a vast array of sources will likewise 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 go back to the presidency.

In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that aimed to improve the safety of AI with, amongst other things, firms in the sector needed to share information of the operations of their systems with the US federal government before they are launched.

But this has actually now been reversed 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 policy.

This comes as a number of claims against AI companies, and particularly versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been gotten by everyone from the New york city Times to authors, music labels, and even a comic.

They declare that the AI firms 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 elements which can constitute fair usage - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it gathers training information and whether it need to be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek claims that it developed its innovation for menwiki.men a fraction of the cost of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's existing dominance of the sector.

When it comes to me and a career as an author, I think that at the minute, if I actually want a "bestseller" I'll still need to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the present weak point in generative AI tools for bigger projects. It is full of errors and hallucinations, and it can be quite difficult to read in parts because it's so verbose.

But offered how rapidly the tech is developing, I'm not sure how long I can stay confident that my substantially slower human writing and editing abilities, are better.

Sign up for wolvesbaneuo.com our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest developments in global innovation, with analysis from BBC reporters around the globe.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.