For Christmas I received an interesting present from a pal - my really own "very popular" book.

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

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

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

It imitates my chatty style of writing, but it's also a bit recurring, and really verbose. It may have exceeded Janet's prompts in collating information about me.

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

There's also a mystical, repeated 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 composing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I contacted the primary executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually offered around 150,000 personalised books, mainly in the US, considering that rotating from putting together AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller costs ₤ 26. The company utilizes its own AI tools to produce them, based on an open source big language design.

I'm not asking you to buy my book. Actually you can't - just Janet, who produced it, can buy any additional copies.

There is currently no barrier to anyone creating one in anybody's name, including celebrities - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around violent material. Each book includes a printed disclaimer specifying that it is fictional, produced by AI, and developed "solely to bring humour and pleasure".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the firm, however Mr Mashiach worries that the product is meant as a "personalised gag gift", and the books do not get offered even more.

He hopes to broaden his range, generating various genres such as sci-fi, and maybe using an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted kind of customer AI - selling AI-generated goods to human consumers.

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

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

"We should be clear, when we are talking about information here, we actually indicate human creators' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to respect developers' 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 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 wildly popular.

"I do not believe using generative AI for innovative functions should be banned, however I do believe that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on individuals's work without permission ought to be banned," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be very effective but let's construct it morally and fairly."

OpenAI states Chinese competitors using its work for garagesale.es 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 - including the BBC - have actually chosen to obstruct AI designers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have decided to team up - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for example.

The UK federal government is considering an overhaul of the law that would permit AI developers to utilize developers' material on the web to assist develop their designs, unless the rights holders decide out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

He mentions 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 changing copyright law and ruining the incomes of the nation's creatives," he argues.

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

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

"The government is weakening one of its finest performing industries on the vague guarantee of development."

A federal government representative stated: "No move will be made till we are absolutely positive we have a practical plan that provides each of our objectives: increased control for ideal holders to help them certify their material, access to top quality product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more openness for best holders from AI designers."

Under the UK federal government's brand-new AI strategy, a national data library consisting of public data from a wide variety of sources will likewise be provided to AI scientists.

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 intended to boost the safety of AI with, to name a few things, firms in the sector required to share details of the functions of their systems with the US federal government before they are launched.

But this has now been repealed by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do instead, but he is stated to desire the AI sector to deal with less policy.

This comes as a variety of suits versus AI companies, and especially against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been gotten by everybody from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.

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

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

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

As for me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the minute, if I truly want a "bestseller" I'll still have to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the present weak point in generative AI tools for larger projects. It is full of errors and hallucinations, and it can be rather hard to check out in parts since it's so long-winded.

But provided how quickly the tech is evolving, I'm uncertain how long I can stay confident that my significantly slower human writing and modifying abilities, are much better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the greatest developments in international technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents around the globe.

Outside the UK? Register here.