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

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

Yet it was completely composed by AI, with a few basic prompts about me provided by my buddy Janet.

It's a fascinating 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 imitates my chatty design of writing, but it's likewise a bit repeated, and really verbose. It might have surpassed Janet's triggers in looking at data about me.

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

There's also a mystical, repeated hallucination in the kind of my cat (I have no family pets). And there's a metaphor on nearly every page - some more random than others.

There are lots of companies online offering AI-book composing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I called the primary executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had sold around 150,000 customised books, mainly in the US, because pivoting from putting together 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 produce them, based on an open source large language model.

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

There is presently no barrier to anybody producing one in anyone's name, consisting of celebs - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around violent material. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is fictional, created by AI, galgbtqhistoryproject.org and created "entirely to bring humour and delight".

Legally, the copyright comes from the company, however Mr Mashiach worries that the item is planned as a "personalised gag present", and the books do not get sold even more.

He intends to broaden his variety, creating various categories such as sci-fi, and maybe providing an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted form of customer AI - offering AI-generated products to human clients.

It's likewise a bit frightening if, like me, you compose for a living. Not least because it probably took less than a minute to create, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound similar to me.

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

"We must be clear, when we are discussing data here, we in fact mean human creators' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to respect creators' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is photos. It's works of art. 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 featuring AI-generated voices of Canadian singers 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 developer trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And despite the fact that the artists were fake, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not think making use of generative AI for innovative functions should be banned, but I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without consent must be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be extremely powerful however let's build it fairly 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 - consisting of the BBC - have actually chosen to block AI developers from trawling their online content for training purposes. Others have chosen to work together - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for instance.

The UK federal government is considering an overhaul of the law that would enable AI developers to utilize creators' material on the web to assist develop their designs, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

He explains 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 changing copyright law and messing up the incomes of the nation's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in the House of Lords, is also strongly against getting rid of copyright law for AI.

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

"The federal government is weakening one of its finest carrying out markets on the vague promise of development."

A federal government spokesperson said: "No relocation will be made until we are definitely positive we have a useful strategy that provides each of our objectives: increased control for right holders to help them certify their content, access to premium material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more transparency for best holders from AI designers."

Under the UK government's brand-new AI plan, a nationwide information library including public information from a wide variety of sources will also be offered to AI scientists.

In the US the future of federal rules 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 boost the safety of AI with, to name a few things, companies in the sector required to share details of the functions of their systems with the US federal government before they are released.

But this has now been repealed by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do instead, but he is stated to desire the AI sector yewiki.org to deal with less regulation.

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

They declare that the AI firms broke the law when they took their content from the web without their consent, and used it to train their systems.

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

If this wasn't all sufficient to contemplate, Chinese AI company DeepSeek has shaken the sector over the previous week. It ended up being the a lot of downloaded totally free app on Apple's US App Store.

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

When it comes to me and a career as an author, wiki.snooze-hotelsoftware.de I think that at the moment, if I actually desire a "bestseller" I'll still have to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weak point in generative AI tools for larger projects. It has lots of errors and hallucinations, and it can be rather difficult to read in parts because it's so long-winded.

But provided how quickly the tech is developing, I'm uncertain how long I can remain confident that my considerably slower human writing and modifying abilities, are better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the most significant developments in worldwide innovation, with analysis from BBC correspondents around the world.

Outside the UK? Register here.