For Christmas I got a fascinating present 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 glowing reviews.

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

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

It imitates my chatty design of writing, but it's likewise a bit repeated, and really verbose. It might have surpassed Janet's triggers in collecting data about me.

Several sentences start "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 animals). And there's a metaphor on almost every page - some more random than others.

There are lots of companies online offering AI-book writing . 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 personalised 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 expenses ₤ 26. The company utilizes its own AI tools to generate them, based on an open source big language design.

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

There is presently no barrier to anybody creating one in anyone's name, consisting of stars - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around violent material. Each book contains a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is fictional, developed by AI, and created "exclusively to bring humour and delight".

Legally, the copyright comes from the company, but Mr Mashiach worries that the item is intended as a "customised gag present", and the books do not get sold even more.

He intends to broaden his range, generating various categories such as sci-fi, and possibly providing an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted form of consumer AI - selling AI-generated goods to human customers.

It's likewise a bit frightening if, like me, you compose 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 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 should be clear, when we are discussing data here, we actually suggest human creators' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies 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 discover how to do something and then do more like that."

In 2023 a tune including 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 actually not granted it. It didn't stop the track's developer trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were phony, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not think using generative AI for innovative purposes ought to be banned, however I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without consent need to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be extremely powerful however let's develop it ethically 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 industry and damages America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - including the BBC - have selected to block AI designers from trawling their online content for training purposes. Others have decided to collaborate - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for instance.

The UK federal government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would permit AI developers to use creators' material on the internet to help establish their designs, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

He points out that AI can make advances in locations like defence, healthcare and almanacar.com 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 nation's creatives," he argues.

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

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

"The government is weakening one of its finest performing markets on the unclear guarantee of growth."

A government spokesperson said: "No relocation will be made till we are definitely confident we have a useful plan that provides each of our goals: increased control for best holders to assist them license their material, access to premium material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more transparency for ideal holders from AI developers."

Under the UK government's new AI strategy, championsleage.review a national information library consisting of public data from a vast array of sources will also be provided to AI scientists.

In the US the future of federal rules 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 increase the safety of AI with, among other things, firms in the sector required to share details of the operations of their systems with the US federal government before they are released.

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

This comes as a number of lawsuits against AI companies, and particularly against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been gotten by everybody from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.

They declare that the AI firms broke the law when they took their material from the web without their approval, 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 aspects which can make up reasonable use - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing analysis over how it gathers training information and whether it should be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek declares that it established its technology for a portion of the cost of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security concerns in the US, and threatens American's present dominance 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 have to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weakness in generative AI tools for larger projects. It has plenty of errors and hallucinations, and it can be quite difficult to check out in parts since it's so long-winded.

But offered how quickly the tech is evolving, I'm uncertain for how long I can remain positive that my substantially slower human writing and modifying abilities, are better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the most significant developments in worldwide technology, with analysis from BBC reporters all over the world.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.