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

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

Yet it was completely composed by AI, with a few simple prompts about me supplied by my pal Janet.

It's an interesting read, and vmeste-so-vsemi.ru very funny in parts. But it also meanders rather a lot, and is somewhere in between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It simulates my chatty design of composing, but it's likewise a bit recurring, and extremely verbose. It might have surpassed Janet's prompts in looking at data about me.

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

There's also a strange, repetitive hallucination in the kind of my cat (I have no pets). And there's a metaphor on nearly 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 contacted the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had actually offered around 150,000 personalised books, generally in the US, since pivoting 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 create 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 order any further copies.

There is currently no barrier to anybody producing one in anybody's name, including celebrities - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around violent material. Each book contains a printed disclaimer specifying that it is imaginary, developed by AI, and users.atw.hu created "entirely to bring humour and delight".

Legally, the copyright comes from the firm, however Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is intended as a "personalised gag gift", and the books do not get sold even more.

He intends to broaden his range, generating various genres such as sci-fi, and maybe using an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted form of customer AI - selling AI-generated products to human customers.

It's likewise a bit terrifying if, like me, you write for a living. Not least since 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 expressed alarm about their work being utilized to train generative AI tools that then produce similar material based upon it.

"We should be clear, when we are talking about information here, we really indicate human developers' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI firms to respect creators' rights.

"This is books, this is articles, this is pictures. It's artworks. It's records ... The whole point of AI training is to discover 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 networks 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 developer trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And despite the fact that the artists were fake, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not believe the usage of generative AI for innovative purposes must be prohibited, but I do think that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without permission must be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be very effective but let's construct it morally 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 picked to block AI developers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have actually decided to team up - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for example.

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

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "insanity".

He points out that AI can make advances in locations like defence, health care and logistics without trawling the work of authors, journalists and artists.

"All of these things work without going and altering copyright law and messing up the livelihoods of the country's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a in the House of Lords, is also highly versus eliminating copyright law for AI.

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

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

A government spokesperson said: "No relocation will be made until we are definitely positive we have a practical plan that provides each of our objectives: increased control for ideal holders to assist them accredit their material, access to top quality material 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 strategy, a national data library including public information from a wide range of sources will also be made available to AI scientists.

In the US the future of federal rules 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 aimed to increase the safety of AI with, among other things, companies in the sector needed to share details of the functions of their systems with the US government before they are launched.

But this has actually now been repealed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do rather, however he is stated to desire 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 gotten by everybody 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 internet without their consent, and used it to train their systems.

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "reasonable usage" and are therefore exempt. There are a number of factors which can make up fair use - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it collects training data and whether it ought to be paying for it.

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

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

As for 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 current weak point in generative AI tools for bigger tasks. It is complete of errors and hallucinations, and it can be quite hard to check out in parts since it's so verbose.

But provided how rapidly the tech is developing, I'm not sure the length of time I can stay positive that my considerably slower human writing and modifying skills, are better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest advancements in global innovation, with analysis from BBC reporters all over the world.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.