For Christmas I got a fascinating present from a pal - my very own "best-selling" book.

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (terrific title) bears my name and suvenir51.ru my image on its cover, and it has radiant evaluations.

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

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

It imitates my chatty style of composing, but it's likewise a bit repeated, gratisafhalen.be and extremely verbose. It might have exceeded Janet's triggers in collating data about me.

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

There's also a mystical, repeated 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 got in touch with the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had offered around 150,000 customised books, oke.zone generally in the US, because 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 generate them, based upon an open source big language model.

I'm not asking you to buy my book. Actually you can't - only Janet, who developed it, can purchase any more copies.

There is presently no barrier to anybody developing one in anyone's name, consisting of celebs - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer stating that it is imaginary, created by AI, and created "solely to bring humour and pleasure".

Legally, the copyright comes from the firm, however Mr Mashiach stresses that the product is intended as a "customised gag gift", and the books do not get sold further.

He wishes to broaden his range, creating different genres such as sci-fi, and maybe providing an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted form of consumer AI - offering AI-generated goods to human consumers.

It's likewise a bit scary if, like me, you write for a living. Not least since it probably took less than a minute to generate, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound just like me.

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

"We need to be clear, when we are speaking about data here, we actually indicate human creators' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI firms to regard creators' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, 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 after that do more like that."

In 2023 a song featuring AI-generated voices of Canadian singers Drake and 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 attempting to choose it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were fake, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not believe making use of generative AI for creative functions ought to be prohibited, however I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without consent should be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be extremely effective but let's develop it fairly and relatively."

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 dents America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - consisting of the BBC - have actually chosen to block AI developers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have actually decided to collaborate - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for instance.

The UK federal government is considering an overhaul of the law that would permit AI developers to utilize developers' material on the internet to assist develop their designs, 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 changing copyright law and messing up the incomes of the country's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, is likewise strongly versus removing copyright law for AI.

"Creative markets are wealth creators, 2.4 million tasks and a great deal of delight," says the Baroness, who is likewise a consultant to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

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

A government representative said: "No relocation will be made till we are absolutely confident we have a practical plan that provides each of our objectives: increased control for ideal holders to assist them certify their content, access to premium product to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more openness for ideal holders from AI developers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI plan, a national information library including public information from a wide range of sources will also be provided 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 intended to improve the security of AI with, to name a few things, companies in the sector needed to of the workings of their systems with the US federal government before they are launched.

But this has now been rescinded by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do rather, however he is said to desire the AI sector to face less regulation.

This comes as a variety of lawsuits versus AI firms, and especially against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been secured by everyone from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comic.

They declare that the AI companies broke the law when they took their content from the web without their approval, and utilized it to train their systems.

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

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

DeepSeek claims that it developed its technology for a fraction of the rate 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 think that at the moment, if I really want a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the present weakness in generative AI tools for bigger tasks. It is full of inaccuracies and hallucinations, and it can be quite hard to read in parts due to the fact that it's so verbose.

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

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the most significant advancements in international innovation, with analysis from BBC reporters around the world.

Outside the UK? Register here.