For Christmas I received an interesting present 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 radiant evaluations.

Yet it was entirely composed by AI, with a couple of easy triggers about me supplied by my friend Janet.

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

It mimics my chatty style of composing, but it's likewise a bit recurring, and really verbose. It may have exceeded Janet's prompts in collating 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 mystical, repetitive hallucination in the form of my feline (I have no family pets). And there's a metaphor on almost 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 called the chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually offered around 150,000 customised books, mainly 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 uses its own AI tools to generate them, based upon an open source large language design.

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

There is currently no barrier to anybody developing one in anyone's name, consisting of celebs - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around violent material. Each book contains a printed disclaimer stating that it is imaginary, produced by AI, and created "entirely to bring humour and happiness".

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

He intends to expand his variety, creating different genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps providing an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted type of customer AI - selling AI-generated goods to human clients.

It's also a bit frightening if, like me, you write for a living. Not least since it most likely 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 revealed alarm about their work being used to train generative AI tools that then produce comparable material based upon it.

"We must be clear, when we are discussing data here, we actually suggest human developers' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI firms to respect developers' rights.

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

"I do not think using generative AI for imaginative functions must be banned, however I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without approval must be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be very effective however let's develop it morally and fairly."

OpenAI states Chinese competitors using 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 actually chosen to obstruct AI designers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have actually chosen to work together - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for instance.

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

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

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

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

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

"Creative markets are wealth developers, 2.4 million tasks and a great deal of happiness," states the Baroness, who is likewise an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The federal government is undermining one of its finest carrying out industries on the unclear guarantee of growth."

A federal government representative stated: "No relocation will be made until we are absolutely positive we have a useful plan that provides each of our goals: increased control for ideal holders to help them accredit their content, access to premium material to train leading AI models in the UK, and more openness for best holders from AI developers."

Under the UK federal government's brand-new AI strategy, a national data library containing public data from a large range of sources will also be provided to AI scientists.

In the US the future of federal guidelines to manage 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, amongst other things, companies in the sector needed 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 rather, however he is stated to desire the AI sector to deal with less policy.

This comes as a number of suits versus AI companies, and especially against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been taken out by everyone from the New york city Times to authors, music labels, and even a comic.

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 "reasonable usage" and are for that reason exempt. There are a number of aspects which can make up fair use - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it gathers training data and whether it ought to be paying for it.

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

DeepSeek declares that it established its technology for a portion of the rate of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has raised security concerns in the US, and threatens American's present dominance of the sector.

As for me and a career as an author, I think that at the minute, ghetto-art-asso.com if I really desire a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weakness in generative AI tools for bigger tasks. It has plenty of inaccuracies and hallucinations, and it can be quite tough to check out in parts due to the fact that it's so verbose.

But provided how quickly the tech is progressing, I'm not sure for how long I can remain confident that my considerably slower human writing and editing abilities, are better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest advancements in global technology, with analysis from BBC reporters worldwide.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.