For Christmas I received a fascinating present from a friend - my extremely own "very popular" book.

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

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

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

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

There's also a mysterious, repeated hallucination in the type of my feline (I have no pets). And photorum.eclat-mauve.fr there's a metaphor on nearly every page - some more random than others.

There are dozens of companies online offering AI-book writing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I contacted the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually offered around 150,000 personalised books, primarily in the US, given that rotating 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 utilizes its own AI tools to create them, based on an open source large language design.

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

There is presently no barrier to anybody producing one in anyone's name, consisting of stars - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around violent content. Each book contains a printed disclaimer specifying that it is imaginary, created by AI, and developed "entirely to bring humour and joy".

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

He hopes to expand his variety, generating different genres such as sci-fi, and possibly offering an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted form of consumer AI - selling AI-generated items to human clients.

It's also a bit terrifying if, like me, you write for a living. Not least since it probably took less than a minute to generate, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound simply like me.

Musicians, authors, artists and stars worldwide have actually expressed alarm about their work being used to train generative AI tools that then churn out similar content based upon it.

"We must be clear, when we are speaking about information here, we in fact mean human developers' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI firms to regard creators' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is photos. It's artworks. It's records ... The whole point of AI training is to discover how to do something and after that 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 not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's developer trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And although the artists were phony, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not think the use of generative AI for creative purposes need to be prohibited, however I do think that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without approval must be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be extremely effective but let's construct it morally and fairly."

OpenAI says Chinese rivals utilizing its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

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

In the UK some organisations - consisting of the BBC - have actually picked to block AI designers from trawling their online material for training purposes. Others have actually decided to collaborate - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for example.

The UK federal government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would permit AI designers to use developers' material on the web to help develop their designs, unless the rights holders decide out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

He mentions that AI can make advances in areas like defence, healthcare and logistics without trawling the work of authors, journalists and artists.

"All of these things work without going and altering copyright law and ruining the incomes of the nation's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in the House of Lords, is likewise highly against removing copyright law for AI.

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

"The federal government is weakening among its best performing industries on the vague pledge of development."

A federal government spokesperson stated: "No relocation will be made until we are absolutely confident we have a practical strategy that provides each of our objectives: increased control for right holders to help them certify their content, access to high-quality material to train leading AI models in the UK, and more transparency for best holders from AI developers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI plan, a nationwide data library including public information from a broad variety of sources will likewise be offered to AI researchers.

In the US the future of federal guidelines 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 intended to improve the safety of AI with, amongst other things, firms in the sector required to share details of the workings of their systems with the US government before they are launched.

But this has now been rescinded 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 variety of lawsuits versus AI companies, and especially versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been secured by everybody from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.

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

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "fair use" and are for that reason exempt. There are a variety of elements which can constitute reasonable usage - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it gathers training information and whether it ought to be spending for it.

If this wasn't all adequate to contemplate, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek has actually shaken the sector over the past week. It ended up being the many downloaded complimentary app on Apple's US App Store.

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

When it comes to me and a career as an author, I believe that at the minute, if I really desire 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 larger projects. It has lots of errors and hallucinations, and it can be rather tough to check out in parts since it's so long-winded.

But provided how rapidly the tech is progressing, photorum.eclat-mauve.fr I'm uncertain the length of time 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 biggest developments in worldwide technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents around the world.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.