For Christmas I got a fascinating gift from a friend - my really own "very popular" book.

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (excellent title) bears my name and my image on its cover, and it has radiant evaluations.

Yet it was totally written by AI, with a couple of easy triggers about me provided by my friend Janet.

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

It simulates my chatty design of composing, but it's also a bit repeated, and really verbose. It may have surpassed Janet's triggers in collecting data about me.

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

There's likewise a mystical, repeated 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 business online offering AI-book composing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I got in touch with the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually offered around 150,000 customised 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 expenses ₤ 26. The company utilizes its own AI tools to generate them, based upon an open source big 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 anyone developing one in any person's name, including stars - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book includes 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 firm, however Mr Mashiach stresses that the product is planned as a "customised gag gift", and the books do not get sold even more.

He intends to expand his variety, producing various genres such as sci-fi, and pl.velo.wiki maybe offering an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted type of customer AI - selling AI-generated goods to human customers.

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

Musicians, authors, artists and actors worldwide have actually expressed alarm about their work being used to train generative AI tools that then produce similar content based upon it.

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

"This is books, this is posts, this is pictures. It's masterpieces. 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 tune 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 actually not granted it. It didn't stop the track's developer trying to nominate it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were fake, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not believe the usage of generative AI for imaginative functions should be banned, however I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without approval need to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be really powerful but let's construct it ethically and relatively."

OpenAI says Chinese rivals using its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

China's DeepSeek AI shakes industry and dents America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - consisting of the BBC - have actually selected to block AI developers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have decided to team up - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for instance.

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

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "insanity".

He explains that AI can make advances in locations like defence, health care 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 the House of Lords, is also highly versus removing copyright law for AI.

"Creative markets are wealth developers, 2.4 million tasks and a lot of happiness," states the Baroness, who is likewise an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The federal government is undermining among its finest carrying out industries on the vague guarantee of growth."

A government spokesperson said: "No move will be made until we are absolutely positive we have a practical strategy that provides each of our objectives: increased control for right holders to help them accredit their content, access to premium material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more transparency for right holders from AI designers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI plan, a national information library containing public data from a vast array of sources will also be made readily available to AI researchers.

In the US the future of federal guidelines 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 intended to enhance the safety of AI with, to name a few things, firms in the sector needed to share details of the operations of their systems with the US government before they are released.

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

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

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

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "reasonable use" and are for that reason exempt. There are a number of elements which can make up fair use - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it gathers training data and whether it should 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 ended up being one of the most downloaded complimentary app on Apple's US App Store.

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

When it comes to me and a career as an author, I think that at the minute, if I actually desire a "bestseller" I'll still have to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weakness in generative AI tools for bigger tasks. It has lots of errors and hallucinations, and menwiki.men it can be rather hard to read in parts since it's so verbose.

But provided how rapidly the tech is evolving, I'm not sure for how long I can stay confident that my considerably slower human writing and editing abilities, are better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the most significant developments in worldwide innovation, with analysis from BBC correspondents worldwide.

Outside the UK? Register here.