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

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

Yet it was completely composed by AI, with a couple of easy triggers about me supplied by my good friend Janet.

It's an interesting read, and really funny in parts. But it also 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 repetitive, and very verbose. It may have surpassed Janet's prompts in collecting 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 kind of my feline (I have no family pets). And there's a metaphor on almost every page - some more random than others.

There are lots 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 sold around 150,000 customised books, primarily in the US, 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 firm uses its own AI tools to produce them, based on an open source large language design.

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

There is presently no barrier to anyone producing one in any person's name, consisting of stars - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around violent content. Each book includes a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is fictional, produced by AI, and developed "solely to bring humour and happiness".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the firm, but Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is meant as a "customised 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 possibly providing an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted type of consumer AI - selling AI-generated goods to human consumers.

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

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

"We should be clear, when we are talking about information here, we in fact indicate human creators' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to respect developers' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is pictures. It's works of art. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to discover 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 because it was not their work and they had not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's developer trying to nominate it for a Grammy award. And although the artists were fake, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not believe the use of generative AI for creative functions must be prohibited, but I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without permission must be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be very powerful however let's develop it morally and fairly."

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 market and dents America's swagger

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

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

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "insanity".

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

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your house of Lords, is likewise strongly versus getting rid of copyright law for AI.

"Creative industries are wealth developers, 2.4 million jobs and a lot of delight," says the Baroness, who is also a consultant to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The government is weakening among its finest carrying out markets on the vague promise of growth."

A government representative said: "No move will be made until we are absolutely positive we have a practical plan that delivers each of our goals: increased control for best holders to assist them certify their content, access to top quality material to train leading AI models in the UK, and more transparency for right holders from AI designers."

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

In the US the future of federal guidelines to manage 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, amongst other things, companies in the sector required to share details of the functions of their systems with the US government before they are released.

But this has now been reversed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do rather, but he is said to want the AI sector to face less guideline.

This comes as a variety of claims against AI firms, and particularly versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been secured by everybody from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.

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

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

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

DeepSeek claims that it established its innovation for surgiteams.com a portion of the price of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's current dominance of the sector.

As for me and a career as an author, I think that at the minute, demo.qkseo.in if I really desire a "bestseller" I'll still have to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the present weakness in generative AI tools for larger projects. It has lots of inaccuracies and hallucinations, and it can be quite tough to check out in parts due to the fact that it's so .

But offered how quickly the tech is progressing, I'm unsure how long I can remain confident that my substantially slower human writing and modifying abilities, are better.

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

Outside the UK? Sign up here.