For Christmas I got an intriguing present from a friend - my extremely own "very popular" book.

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

Yet it was entirely composed by AI, with a few easy triggers about me provided by my friend Janet.

It's an interesting read, and very funny in parts. But it also meanders quite a lot, and is someplace in between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It imitates my chatty design of writing, however it's likewise a bit repeated, and really verbose. It might have surpassed Janet's prompts in looking at data about me.

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

There's also a strange, repetitive hallucination in the kind of my cat (I have no pets). And there's a metaphor on practically every page - some more random than others.

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

When I contacted the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had sold around 150,000 personalised books, generally in the US, given that rotating from assembling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller costs ₤ 26. The firm utilizes its own AI tools to create them, forum.altaycoins.com based on an open source large language design.

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

There is presently no barrier to anybody creating one in anybody's name, including celebs - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book contains a printed disclaimer stating that it is imaginary, created by AI, and developed "entirely 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 sold further.

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

It's likewise a bit terrifying if, like me, you write for a living. Not least since it probably took less than a minute to produce, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound much like me.

Musicians, authors, artists and actors worldwide have expressed 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 discussing data here, we in fact mean human developers' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to respect developers' rights.

"This is books, this is short articles, this is photos. It's works of art. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to find out 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 networks before being pulled from streaming platforms due to the fact that it was not their work and historydb.date they had not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's creator attempting to choose it for a Grammy award. And despite the fact that the artists were phony, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not believe making use of generative AI for creative purposes should be banned, but I do think that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without authorization should be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be very effective but let's build it morally 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 chosen to obstruct AI designers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have actually decided to team up - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for instance.

The UK government is considering an overhaul of the law that would permit AI designers to utilize developers' content on the web to help develop their designs, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

He explains 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 messing up the livelihoods of the country's creatives," he argues.

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

"Creative industries are wealth developers, 2.4 million jobs and a great deal of happiness," 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 carrying out industries on the vague guarantee of growth."

A federal government spokesperson stated: "No move will be made till we are absolutely confident we have a useful strategy that delivers each of our goals: increased control for best holders to help them accredit their material, access to top quality product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more openness for best holders from AI designers."

Under the UK government's new AI plan, a national data library consisting of public information from a large variety of sources will likewise be provided to AI researchers.

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

But this has now been repealed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do instead, but he is stated to desire the AI sector gdprhub.eu to face less regulation.

This comes as a number of lawsuits against AI companies, and especially versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been gotten by everyone from the New York Times to authors, engel-und-waisen.de 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 authorization, and utilized it to train their systems.

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

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

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

When it comes to me and a profession as an author, I believe 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 current weakness in generative AI tools for larger tasks. It is complete of inaccuracies and hallucinations, and it can be quite difficult to check out in parts due to the fact that it's so long-winded.

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

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

Outside the UK? Sign up here.