For Christmas I received a fascinating gift from a friend - my extremely own "best-selling" book.

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

Yet it was totally written by AI, with a few basic prompts about me supplied by my pal Janet.

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

It imitates my chatty style of writing, however it's also a bit repetitive, and extremely verbose. It might have surpassed Janet's triggers in collating data about me.

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

There's also a mysterious, 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 dozens of companies online offering AI-book composing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I contacted the primary executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually offered around 150,000 customised books, mainly in the US, since pivoting from compiling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

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

I'm not asking you to buy my book. Actually you can't - just Janet, who produced it, can purchase any additional copies.

There is currently no barrier to anyone creating one in anyone's name, including celebrities - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book includes a printed disclaimer stating that it is imaginary, produced by AI, and created "solely to bring humour and happiness".

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

He wishes to broaden his variety, generating various genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps providing an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted form of consumer AI - selling AI-generated goods to human clients.

It's likewise a bit terrifying if, like me, you compose for a living. Not least due to the fact that it probably took less than a minute to generate, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound much like me.

Musicians, authors, artists and actors worldwide have expressed alarm about their work being utilized to train generative AI tools that then churn out comparable material based upon it.

"We should be clear, when we are discussing information here, we actually mean human creators' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to respect creators' rights.

"This is books, this is articles, this is pictures. It's works of art. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to learn how to do something and then 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 due to the fact that 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 wildly popular.

"I do not believe making use of generative AI for innovative purposes need to be prohibited, but I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without consent ought to be banned," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be really effective but let's build it ethically and fairly."

OpenAI states 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 dents America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - consisting of the BBC - have picked to obstruct AI developers from trawling their online content for training purposes. Others have chosen to work together - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for instance.

The UK government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would allow AI developers to use developers' material on the web to help develop their models, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

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

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

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

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

"The government is undermining one of its finest carrying out markets on the vague promise of growth."

A federal government representative stated: "No relocation will be made till we are absolutely confident we have a practical plan that delivers each of our objectives: increased control for best holders to assist them accredit their content, access to premium material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more transparency for ideal holders from AI designers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI strategy, a nationwide information library containing public information from a vast array of sources will likewise be offered 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 intended to enhance the safety of AI with, forum.kepri.bawaslu.go.id among other things, firms in the sector needed to share information of the functions of their systems with the US government before they are released.

But this has actually now been rescinded by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do rather, pyra-handheld.com but he is said to want the AI sector to deal with less guideline.

This comes as a variety of claims 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 comedian.

They claim that the AI companies broke the law when they took their material from the internet without their authorization, 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 variety of aspects which can make up fair usage - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector it-viking.ch is under increasing examination over how it collects training information and whether it need to be spending for it.

If this wasn't all adequate to ponder, Chinese AI company DeepSeek has actually shaken the sector over the previous week. It became the a lot of downloaded totally free app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek declares that it established its technology for a fraction of the price of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's existing supremacy of the sector.

As for me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the minute, if I really desire a "bestseller" I'll still need to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weakness in generative AI tools for bigger tasks. It has lots of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be rather tough to check out in parts since it's so verbose.

But given how rapidly the tech is progressing, I'm uncertain for how long I can remain confident that my significantly slower human writing and disgaeawiki.info editing abilities, are better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the greatest developments in international innovation, with analysis from BBC correspondents worldwide.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.