For Christmas I got an intriguing present from a pal - my extremely own "very popular" book.

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (excellent title) bears my name and my photo on its cover, and it has radiant reviews.

Yet it was completely composed by AI, oke.zone with a couple of easy prompts about me provided by my good friend Janet.

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

It mimics my chatty style of writing, however it's likewise a bit repeated, and extremely verbose. It might have surpassed Janet's triggers in looking at data about me.

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

There's likewise a mysterious, ratemywifey.com repetitive hallucination in the type of my cat (I have no 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 president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had actually sold around 150,000 customised books, primarily 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 costs ₤ 26. The firm utilizes its own AI tools to produce them, based upon an open source large language design.

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

There is currently 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 contains a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is imaginary, created by AI, and designed "exclusively to bring humour and pleasure".

Legally, the copyright comes from the company, morphomics.science but Mr Mashiach worries that the product is planned as a "customised gag present", and the books do not get sold further.

He wishes to widen his range, creating different genres such as sci-fi, and garagesale.es maybe providing an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted kind of customer AI - offering AI-generated goods to human clients.

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 generate, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound similar to me.

Musicians, authors, artists and actors worldwide have actually revealed alarm about their work being used to train generative AI tools that then churn out similar content based upon it.

"We should be clear, when we are speaking about data here, we actually imply human developers' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to respect developers' rights.

"This is books, this is short articles, this is pictures. It's artworks. 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 including AI-generated voices of Canadian singers 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 developer trying to nominate it for a Grammy award. And although the artists were phony, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not think making use of generative AI for innovative functions must be prohibited, however I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without consent need to be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be extremely effective however let's develop it fairly and fairly."

OpenAI states Chinese rivals using its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

China's DeepSeek AI shakes market and damages America's swagger

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

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

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "insanity".

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 altering copyright law and messing up the livelihoods of the nation's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your house of Lords, is also strongly against eliminating copyright law for AI.

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

"The federal government is weakening among its finest carrying out markets on the unclear guarantee of growth."

A federal government spokesperson said: "No move will be made up until we are absolutely positive we have a practical plan that provides each of our objectives: increased control for best holders to assist them certify their content, access to high-quality material to train leading AI models in the UK, and more openness for best holders from AI designers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI strategy, a nationwide information library consisting of public information from a vast array of sources will also be offered to AI researchers.

In the US the future of federal guidelines 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 aimed to boost the security of AI with, amongst other things, companies in the sector needed to share information of the operations of their systems with the US government before they are released.

But this has now been repealed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do rather, however he is stated to want the AI sector to face less regulation.

This comes as a variety of suits versus AI firms, and especially against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been gotten by everyone from the New York 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 web without their authorization, and used it to train their systems.

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

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

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

When it comes to me and a profession as an author, I think that at the minute, if I actually want a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weakness in generative AI tools for bigger jobs. It has lots of mistakes 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 evolving, I'm not exactly sure for how long I can remain confident that my substantially slower human writing and modifying abilities, are better.

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

Outside the UK? Register here.