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

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (terrific title) bears my name and my picture on its cover, and morphomics.science it has glowing evaluations.

Yet it was entirely written by AI, with a few basic triggers about me provided by my good friend Janet.

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

It imitates my chatty style of composing, however it's also a bit repeated, and really verbose. It may have gone beyond Janet's prompts in collecting data about me.

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

There's likewise a strange, repeated hallucination in the type of my cat (I have no animals). And there's a metaphor on practically 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 called the chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had actually offered around 150,000 customised books, primarily in the US, since 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 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 - just Janet, who developed it, can buy any further copies.

There is currently no barrier to anyone creating one in any person's name, including celebs - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer specifying that it is imaginary, produced by AI, and designed "entirely to bring humour and happiness".

Legally, the copyright comes from the firm, but Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is intended as a "personalised gag present", oke.zone and the books do not get offered even more.

He wants to expand his variety, generating different categories such as sci-fi, christianpedia.com and perhaps providing an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted kind of consumer AI - selling AI-generated items to human clients.

It's likewise a bit frightening if, pl.velo.wiki like me, you compose for a living. Not least due to the fact that it most likely took less than a minute to generate, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound similar to me.

Musicians, authors, wiki.monnaie-libre.fr artists and actors worldwide have expressed alarm about their work being utilized to train generative AI tools that then churn out similar content based upon it.

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

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

In 2023 a song including AI-generated voices of Canadian vocalists Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social networks before being pulled from streaming platforms because it was not their work and they had not granted it. It didn't stop the track's creator trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were phony, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not think using generative AI for innovative purposes need to be banned, but I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without authorization must be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be very powerful but let's develop it ethically and fairly."

OpenAI says Chinese competitors utilizing 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 content for training purposes. Others have decided to collaborate - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for example.

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

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

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

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

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

"Creative industries are wealth creators, 2.4 million tasks and a lot of pleasure," states the Baroness, who is also a consultant to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The government is weakening one of its finest performing markets on the vague pledge of development."

A federal government representative said: "No move will be made till we are definitely confident we have a useful strategy that delivers each of our goals: increased control for ideal holders to assist them certify their material, access to high-quality product to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more openness for best holders from AI designers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI plan, a national data library containing public data from a vast array of sources will also be made 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 enhance the security of AI with, to name a few things, firms in the sector needed to share details of the functions of their systems with the US federal government before they are launched.

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

This comes as a variety of claims versus AI firms, and particularly versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually 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 authorization, and utilized it to train their systems.

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "reasonable usage" and are therefore exempt. There are a variety of elements which can make up fair use - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing analysis over how it collects training information and whether it must be spending for it.

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

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

As for me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the minute, if I truly want a "bestseller" I'll still have to write it myself. If anything, for Dummies highlights the present weakness in generative AI tools for larger tasks. It has lots of inaccuracies and qoocle.com hallucinations, and it can be quite challenging to check out in parts due to the fact that it's so verbose.

But given how quickly the tech is progressing, I'm not exactly sure the length of time I can stay positive that my significantly slower human writing and modifying abilities, are better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the most significant advancements in global technology, with analysis from BBC reporters around the globe.

Outside the UK? Register here.