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

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

Yet it was completely composed by AI, with a few basic prompts about me provided by my good friend Janet.

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

It simulates my chatty style of composing, however it's likewise a bit repeated, and really verbose. It may have gone beyond Janet's triggers in collating data about me.

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

There's likewise a mysterious, repetitive hallucination in the form of my cat (I have no animals). 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 contacted the primary executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had offered around 150,000 personalised books, primarily in the US, orcz.com since rotating from assembling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller costs ₤ 26. The company utilizes its own AI tools to create them, based upon an open source big language model.

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

There is presently no barrier to anyone developing one in any person's name, including celebs - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around violent content. Each book contains a printed disclaimer stating that it is fictional, produced by AI, and designed "entirely to bring humour and pleasure".

Legally, the copyright comes from the firm, but Mr Mashiach stresses that the product is planned as a "personalised gag present", and the books do not get sold even more.

He wishes to widen his variety, creating different categories such as sci-fi, and perhaps offering an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted type of consumer AI - offering AI-generated products to human consumers.

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 produce, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound simply like me.

Musicians, authors, artists and actors worldwide have revealed alarm about their work being utilized to train generative AI tools that then produce comparable material based upon it.

"We must be clear, when we are discussing information here, we actually indicate human creators' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI firms to regard developers' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is images. 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 tune including AI-generated voices of Canadian vocalists Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social media before being pulled from streaming platforms due to the fact that it was not their work and they had actually not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's creator trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And although the artists were phony, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not think using generative AI for creative purposes should be banned, but I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without permission ought to be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be really powerful but let's construct it morally and fairly."

OpenAI states Chinese competitors utilizing 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 - consisting of the BBC - have selected to block AI developers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have chosen to collaborate - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for instance.

The UK government is considering an overhaul of the law that would permit AI designers to use creators' material on the internet to help establish their models, setiathome.berkeley.edu unless the rights holders opt out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "insanity".

He mentions that AI can make advances in areas like defence, healthcare 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 incomes of the country's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, utahsyardsale.com a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, is likewise highly against getting rid of copyright law for AI.

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

"The government is undermining one of its best carrying out industries on the unclear guarantee of development."

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

Under the UK federal government's brand-new AI strategy, a national data library containing public data from a wide variety of sources will also be offered to AI scientists.

In the US the future of federal guidelines to control 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 boost the security of AI with, among other things, companies in the sector required to share details of the workings of their systems with the US government before they are launched.

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

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

They declare that the AI companies broke the law when they took their content from the web without their consent, and utilized it to train their systems.

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "fair use" and are for that reason exempt. There are a variety of factors which can constitute reasonable usage - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it collects training information and whether it ought to be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek claims that it developed its innovation for a portion of the rate of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has actually 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 present weak point in generative AI tools for larger tasks. It has lots of mistakes and hallucinations, wiki.fablabbcn.org and it can be rather difficult to read in parts since it's so verbose.

But offered how quickly the tech is developing, I'm unsure the length of time I can remain 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 innovation, with analysis from BBC correspondents around the globe.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.