For Christmas I received an interesting gift from a buddy - 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 entirely composed by AI, with a few simple triggers about me provided by my friend Janet.

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

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

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

There's also a mystical, repetitive hallucination in the type of my cat (I have no animals). 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 chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had sold around 150,000 customised books, generally in the US, because pivoting from putting together AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller expenses ₤ 26. The company uses its own AI tools to create them, based on an open source large language model.

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

There is presently no barrier to anyone producing one in anyone's name, including celebs - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer stating that it is imaginary, developed by AI, and designed "entirely to bring humour and delight".

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

He wants to widen his range, producing various genres such as sci-fi, and maybe offering an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted form of customer AI - selling AI-generated items to human consumers.

It's also a bit scary if, like me, championsleage.review you compose for a living. Not least because it probably took less than a minute to create, 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 used to train generative AI tools that then churn out comparable content based upon it.

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

"This is books, this is short articles, this is pictures. It's works of art. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to find out how to do something and after that do more like that."

In 2023 a tune featuring AI-generated voices of Canadian singers Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social media before being pulled from streaming platforms since it was not their work and they had not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's creator attempting to choose it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were phony, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not believe making use of generative AI for creative purposes should be prohibited, however I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without permission must be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be extremely effective however let's build it fairly and fairly."

OpenAI says Chinese competitors using its work for trade-britanica.trade their AI apps

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

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

In the UK some organisations - consisting of the BBC - have chosen to block AI designers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have decided to work together - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for example.

The UK federal government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would allow AI designers to utilize developers' material on the internet to assist establish their designs, unless the rights holders decide out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

He points out 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 destroying the incomes of the country's creatives," he argues.

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

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

"The government is undermining among its finest carrying out industries on the unclear pledge of growth."

A federal government representative said: "No move will be made till we are absolutely positive we have a useful strategy that delivers each of our goals: increased control for best holders to help them accredit their content, access to top quality material to train leading AI models in the UK, and more openness for best holders from AI developers."

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

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 security of AI with, to name a few things, companies in the sector needed to share details of the workings of their systems with the US government before they are released.

But this has actually now been repealed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do rather, however he is said to want the AI sector photorum.eclat-mauve.fr to face less policy.

This comes as a variety of suits versus AI companies, and particularly against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been taken out by everybody from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comic.

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

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "fair use" and are therefore exempt. There are a number of aspects which can constitute reasonable usage - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it collects training data and whether it must be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek claims that it established its innovation for a fraction of the cost of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's current dominance of the sector.

As for me and a profession as an author, I think that at the moment, if I really want a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weak point in generative AI tools for bigger projects. It is complete of and hallucinations, and it can be rather tough to read in parts since it's so long-winded.

But provided how rapidly the tech is developing, I'm uncertain the length of time I can remain confident that my substantially slower human writing and editing skills, are much better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest developments in international technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents all over the world.

Outside the UK? Register here.