For Christmas I received an interesting present from a friend - my really own "very popular" book.

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

Yet it was completely written by AI, with a few basic triggers about me supplied by my friend Janet.

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

It imitates my chatty style of composing, but it's likewise a bit repetitive, and really verbose. It might have surpassed Janet's triggers 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 likewise a mysterious, repeated hallucination in the type of my cat (I have no family pets). And there's a metaphor on practically every page - some more random than others.

There are dozens of business 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 assembling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller costs ₤ 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 purchase my book. Actually you can't - only Janet, who developed it, can buy any more copies.

There is presently no barrier to anybody developing one in anybody's name, including celebrities - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around violent content. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer specifying that it is imaginary, created by AI, and designed "exclusively to bring humour and delight".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the company, however Mr Mashiach worries that the item is meant as a "customised gag present", and the books do not get sold even more.

He wants to broaden his variety, creating different genres such as sci-fi, and possibly providing an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted kind of consumer AI - selling AI-generated items to human clients.

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

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

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

"This is books, this is posts, this is photos. It's works of art. 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 featuring AI-generated voices of Canadian vocalists Drake and vokipedia.de The Weeknd went viral on social media before being pulled from streaming platforms because it was not their work and they had actually not granted it. It didn't stop the track's developer trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And although the artists were fake, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not think using generative AI for innovative functions must be prohibited, but I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without authorization must be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be really effective but let's build it ethically and relatively."

OpenAI states Chinese rivals using 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 - including the BBC - have actually chosen to block AI designers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have chosen to team up - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for instance.

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

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "insanity".

He mentions 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 ruining the incomes of the country's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a in your house of Lords, is likewise highly versus eliminating copyright law for AI.

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

"The federal government is undermining among its finest performing markets on the unclear promise of development."

A federal government spokesperson stated: "No relocation will be made till we are absolutely positive we have a useful strategy that provides each of our goals: increased control for right holders to help them certify their content, access to top quality material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more openness for ideal holders from AI designers."

Under the UK government's new AI strategy, a nationwide data library containing public data from a wide variety 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 go back to the presidency.

In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that intended to enhance the safety of AI with, to name a few things, companies 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 desire the AI sector to face less policy.

This comes as a variety of claims against AI firms, and particularly versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been gotten by everyone 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 internet without their permission, and used it to train their systems.

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "fair usage" and are for that reason exempt. There are a number of factors which can constitute reasonable use - 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 sufficient to contemplate, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek has shaken the sector over the previous week. It ended up being the many downloaded totally free app on Apple's US App Store.

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

As for me and a career as an author, I think that at the moment, if I truly desire a "bestseller" I'll still need to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weak point in generative AI tools for larger jobs. It is complete of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be rather hard to read in parts due to the fact that it's so long-winded.

But offered how quickly the tech is progressing, I'm not sure for how long I can stay positive that my substantially slower human writing and editing abilities, are better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the greatest advancements in worldwide technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents all over the world.

Outside the UK? Register here.