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

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

Yet it was completely composed by AI, with a couple of simple triggers about me supplied by my pal Janet.

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

It imitates my chatty design of composing, however it's likewise a bit repetitive, and very verbose. It might have exceeded Janet's triggers in looking at data about me.

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

There's likewise a mysterious, repeated hallucination in the type of my feline (I have no animals). And there's a metaphor on almost every page - some more random than others.

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

When I got in touch with the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had actually sold around 150,000 personalised books, generally in the US, because pivoting from assembling 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 generate 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 developed it, can buy any further copies.

There is currently no barrier to anybody producing one in anybody's name, consisting of celebs - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book includes a printed disclaimer specifying that it is imaginary, created by AI, and designed "solely to bring humour and happiness".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the firm, however Mr Mashiach worries that the item is planned as a "customised gag present", and the books do not get sold further.

He hopes to broaden his variety, creating various genres such as sci-fi, and maybe providing an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted type of customer AI - selling AI-generated products to human consumers.

It's also a bit terrifying if, like me, you write for a living. Not least since it most likely took less than a minute to create, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound similar to me.

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

"We need to be clear, when we are speaking about data here, we really indicate human developers' 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 images. It's works of art. It's records ... The whole point of AI training is to learn how to do something and then do more like that."

In 2023 a tune featuring 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 despite the fact that the artists were fake, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not believe using generative AI for creative purposes need to be prohibited, but I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without approval need to be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be really powerful but let's develop it ethically and fairly."

OpenAI states Chinese rivals utilizing its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: akropolistravel.com The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

China's DeepSeek AI shakes market and swagger

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

The UK federal government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would allow AI designers to use developers' content on the internet to help develop their models, unless the rights holders decide out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

He mentions that AI can make advances in locations like defence, health care 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 livelihoods of the country's creatives," he argues.

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

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

"The federal government is undermining one of its finest performing industries on the vague promise of growth."

A government representative said: "No move will be made until we are absolutely positive we have a practical plan that provides each of our objectives: increased control for ideal holders to assist them accredit their content, access to high-quality product to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more transparency for ideal holders from AI designers."

Under the UK government's new AI strategy, a nationwide information library consisting of public data from a broad range of sources will likewise be offered to AI researchers.

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 improve the security of AI with, among other things, companies in the sector needed to share details of the operations 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 said to want the AI sector to face less regulation.

This comes as a number of claims versus AI companies, and especially against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been gotten by everybody from the New York Times to authors, photorum.eclat-mauve.fr music labels, and yewiki.org even a comic.

They claim that the AI companies broke the law when they took their content from the internet without their authorization, and used it to train their systems.

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "reasonable usage" and are for mediawiki.hcah.in that reason exempt. There are a variety of factors which can constitute fair usage - 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 spending for it.

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

DeepSeek claims that it developed its technology for a fraction of the cost of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has raised security concerns in the US, and threatens American's current supremacy of the sector.

As for me and a profession as an author, I think that at the minute, if I truly want a "bestseller" I'll still need to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weak point in generative AI tools for larger jobs. It is complete of errors and hallucinations, and it can be rather hard to read in parts since it's so verbose.

But provided how rapidly the tech is evolving, I'm unsure for how long I can stay positive that my considerably slower human writing and editing abilities, are better.

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

Outside the UK? Sign up here.