For Christmas I got an intriguing gift from a buddy - my really own "very popular" book.

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

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

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

It simulates my chatty style of composing, but it's also a bit repetitive, and wiki.myamens.com really verbose. It may have surpassed Janet's prompts in collecting data about me.

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

There's likewise a mystical, repeated hallucination in the type of my feline (I have no animals). And there's a metaphor on nearly 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 chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually offered around 150,000 personalised books, primarily in the US, since 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 create them, based on an open source large language design.

I'm not asking you to purchase my book. Actually you can't - just Janet, who developed it, can order any further copies.

There is currently no barrier to anyone developing one in anybody's name, including celebs - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around violent material. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer specifying that it is fictional, produced by AI, and developed "entirely to bring humour and happiness".

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

He wishes to expand his range, creating various categories such as sci-fi, and possibly providing an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted type of customer AI - selling AI-generated items to human customers.

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 produce, and it does, certainly 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 comparable material based upon it.

"We ought to be clear, when we are speaking about information here, we actually mean human developers' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI companies to regard developers' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is images. It's artworks. It's records ... The entire 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 media before being pulled from streaming platforms because it was not their work and they had not consented to 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 phony, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not believe making use of generative AI for innovative purposes must be prohibited, however I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without authorization ought to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be very 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 market and dents America's swagger

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

The UK federal government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would permit AI designers to use creators' material on the web to help establish their models, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

He explains that AI can make advances in locations like defence, healthcare and logistics without trawling the work of authors, and artists.

"All of these things work without going and changing copyright law and destroying the livelihoods of the nation's creatives," he argues.

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

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

"The government is undermining one of its best carrying out markets on the vague pledge of growth."

A government spokesperson stated: "No move will be made until we are definitely positive we have a practical strategy that delivers each of our goals: increased control for ideal holders to help them accredit their content, access to top quality material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more openness for ideal holders from AI designers."

Under the UK government's new AI strategy, a nationwide data library consisting of public data from a wide variety 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 return to the presidency.

In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that intended to improve the safety of AI with, to name a few things, firms in the sector required to share information of the functions of their systems with the US federal government before they are launched.

But this has now been reversed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do rather, but he is said to desire the AI sector to deal with less guideline.

This comes as a variety of claims against AI companies, and especially against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been secured by everybody from the New york city Times to authors, music labels, and even a comic.

They claim 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 "reasonable use" and are therefore exempt. There are a number of aspects which can constitute fair use - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing analysis over how it gathers training information and whether it must be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek claims that it established its innovation for a portion of the price of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's current dominance of the sector.

When it comes to me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the moment, if I truly desire 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 projects. It is full of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be rather difficult to check out in parts due to the fact that it's so long-winded.

But given how quickly the tech is progressing, I'm not sure how long I can remain confident that my substantially slower human writing and editing abilities, are much better.

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

Outside the UK? Register here.