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

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

Yet it was completely composed by AI, with a couple of basic prompts about me supplied by my buddy Janet.

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

It mimics my chatty design of composing, however it's likewise a bit repeated, and very verbose. It might have exceeded Janet's triggers in collecting information about me.

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

There's likewise a strange, repeated hallucination in the kind of my cat (I have no family pets). And there's a metaphor on practically 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 called the primary executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually offered around 150,000 personalised books, mainly in the US, because pivoting 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 produce them, based on an open source big language design.

I'm not asking you to buy my book. Actually you can't - only Janet, ratemywifey.com who produced it, can purchase any more copies.

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

Legally, the copyright belongs to the firm, photorum.eclat-mauve.fr but Mr Mashiach worries that the product is planned as a "personalised gag gift", and the books do not get offered further.

He wants to expand his variety, generating various categories such as sci-fi, and perhaps using an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted kind of customer AI - offering AI-generated goods to human consumers.

It's likewise a bit frightening if, like me, you write for a living. Not least due to the fact that it most likely took less than a minute to generate, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound much like me.

Musicians, authors, artists and stars worldwide have revealed alarm about their work being utilized to train generative AI tools that then churn out comparable content based upon it.

"We ought to be clear, when we are discussing information here, we in fact imply human developers' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI firms to regard developers' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is images. It's artworks. It's records ... The whole point of AI training is to find out how to do something and then do more like that."

In 2023 a tune featuring 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 not granted 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 think making use of generative AI for innovative purposes should be banned, but I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without authorization need to be banned," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be really effective but let's develop it ethically and relatively."

OpenAI states Chinese competitors using its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

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

In the UK some organisations - including the BBC - have actually selected to obstruct AI developers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have decided to team up - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for example.

The UK government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would enable AI designers to utilize developers' material on the web to help establish their models, 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 changing 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 also highly versus removing copyright law for AI.

"Creative industries 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 one of its best performing industries on the vague promise of development."

A government spokesperson stated: "No relocation will be made until we are definitely positive we have a useful strategy that delivers each of our objectives: increased control for right holders to help them certify their material, access to premium product to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more openness for right holders from AI designers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI plan, a nationwide information library containing public information from a large range of sources will likewise be provided 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 an executive order that aimed to improve the security of AI with, to name a few things, companies in the sector required to share details of the functions of their systems with the US federal government before they are launched.

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

This comes as a number of claims versus AI companies, and especially versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually 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 material from the web 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 number of aspects which can make up fair use - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing analysis over how it gathers training data and whether it ought to be paying for it.

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

DeepSeek declares that it established its technology for a fraction of the cost of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's present supremacy of the sector.

When it comes to me and a profession as an author, I think that at the minute, if I truly 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 jobs. It has lots of errors and hallucinations, wiki.die-karte-bitte.de and it can be quite hard to read in parts due to the fact that it's so long-winded.

But provided how quickly the tech is developing, I'm unsure for how long I can remain positive that my significantly slower human writing and editing skills, are much better.

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

Outside the UK? Sign up here.