For Christmas I got an interesting gift from a good friend - my really own "very popular" book.

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

Yet it was totally written by AI, with a couple of simple triggers about me supplied by my good friend Janet.

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

It mimics my chatty style of composing, however it's likewise a bit repeated, and really verbose. It might have surpassed Janet's triggers in collating information about me.

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

There's also a mysterious, repetitive hallucination in the kind of my feline (I have no pets). And there's a metaphor on practically every page - some more random than others.

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

When I contacted the primary executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had actually offered around 150,000 personalised books, generally in the US, given that rotating from compiling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller expenses ₤ 26. The company utilizes its own AI tools to produce 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 created it, can buy any additional copies.

There is currently no barrier to anybody producing one in anybody's name, consisting of stars - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around violent material. Each book includes a printed disclaimer specifying that it is fictional, developed by AI, and developed "entirely to bring humour and joy".

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

He hopes to broaden his range, creating different genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps using an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted form of consumer AI - selling AI-generated items to human clients.

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, definitely in some parts, sound much 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 ought to be clear, when we are talking about data here, we in fact indicate human creators' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI companies to respect creators' rights.

"This is books, this is articles, this is photos. 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 including AI-generated voices of Canadian vocalists Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social networks 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 creator trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And although the artists were fake, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not believe using generative AI for innovative purposes must be prohibited, however I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without permission must be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be extremely effective but let's construct it morally and fairly."

OpenAI states Chinese competitors utilizing 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 purposes. Others have actually chosen to team up - the Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for instance.

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

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "insanity".

He points out that AI can make advances in areas like defence, health care and logistics without trawling the work of authors, journalists 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 crossbench peer in your house of Lords, is likewise strongly versus removing copyright law for AI.

"Creative industries are wealth developers, 2.4 million tasks and a lot of pleasure," says the Baroness, who is also a consultant to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The government is weakening among its finest carrying out markets on the vague promise of growth."

A government representative said: "No relocation will be made up until we are absolutely positive we have a practical strategy that provides each of our objectives: increased control for best holders to assist them certify their material, access to premium product to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more openness for right holders from AI designers."

Under the UK federal government's brand-new AI plan, a national data library consisting of public data from a vast array of sources will also be made 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 return to the presidency.

In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that intended to increase 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 federal government before they are released.

But this has now been rescinded by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do rather, but he is said to want the AI sector wolvesbaneuo.com to deal with less regulation.

This comes as a number of claims versus AI companies, and particularly against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually 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 used it to train their systems.

The AI companies argue that their actions fall under "reasonable use" and are for that reason exempt. There are a number of factors which can constitute reasonable usage - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing analysis over how it collects training data and whether it must be spending for it.

If this wasn't all sufficient to contemplate, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek has actually shaken the sector over the past week. It ended up being the many downloaded totally free app on Apple's US App Store.

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

When it comes to me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the minute, if I actually want a "bestseller" I'll still have to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weakness in generative AI tools for larger tasks. It has plenty of inaccuracies and hallucinations, and it can be quite tough to check out in parts since it's so long-winded.

But offered how quickly the tech is evolving, galgbtqhistoryproject.org I'm not sure how long I can remain confident that my significantly slower human writing and editing abilities, are better.

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

Outside the UK? Register here.