For Christmas I got an interesting gift from a good friend - my extremely own "best-selling" book.

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (great title) bears my name and my photo on its cover, and photorum.eclat-mauve.fr it has radiant evaluations.

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

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

It imitates my chatty design of composing, but it's also a bit repeated, and very verbose. It may have exceeded Janet's triggers in looking at information about me.

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

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

There are dozens of business 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 sold around 150,000 customised books, generally in the US, since rotating from assembling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller costs ₤ 26. The firm uses its own AI tools to create them, based on an open source large language model.

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

There is presently no barrier to anyone developing one in anyone's name, consisting of stars - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is imaginary, produced by AI, and created "solely to bring humour and happiness".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the firm, but Mr Mashiach stresses that the product is meant as a "personalised gag gift", and the books do not get offered further.

He wants to widen his range, different genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps offering an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted form of consumer AI - offering AI-generated products to human customers.

It's likewise a bit terrifying if, like me, you write for a living. Not least because it probably took less than a minute to generate, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound similar to me.

Musicians, authors, artists and stars worldwide have expressed alarm about their work being used to train generative AI tools that then produce comparable content based upon it.

"We ought to be clear, when we are talking about information here, we in fact mean human creators' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI firms to regard 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 discover 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 due to the fact that it was not their work and they had actually not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's creator trying to nominate it for a Grammy award. And despite the fact that the artists were phony, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not believe the use of generative AI for imaginative functions should be prohibited, however I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without consent must be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be very powerful but let's develop it fairly and relatively."

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 damages America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - consisting of the BBC - have actually selected to obstruct AI designers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have actually decided to collaborate - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for instance.

The UK government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would allow AI developers to use developers' material on the internet to assist establish their models, unless the rights holders opt out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

He points out that AI can make advances in locations 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 messing up the livelihoods of the country's creatives," he argues.

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

"Creative markets are wealth creators, 2.4 million tasks and a lot of happiness," says the Baroness, library.kemu.ac.ke who is likewise a consultant to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

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

A federal government spokesperson stated: "No move will be made up until we are definitely positive we have a useful plan that delivers each of our goals: increased control for right holders to assist them accredit their content, access to premium product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more transparency for ideal holders from AI developers."

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 rules to control 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, amongst other things, companies in the sector required to share details of the functions of their systems with the US government before they are launched.

But this has now been rescinded by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do rather, however he is said to desire the AI sector to face less guideline.

This comes as a number of lawsuits against AI firms, and especially against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been secured by everyone from the New York 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 approval, and utilized it to train their systems.

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "fair use" and are therefore exempt. There are a variety of aspects which can constitute reasonable usage - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing examination over how it gathers training information and whether it need to 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 became the a lot of downloaded totally free app on Apple's US App Store.

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

As for me and a profession as an author, I think that at the minute, if I really want a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weak point in generative AI tools for larger projects. It is full of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be rather tough to read in parts because it's so verbose.

But offered how rapidly the tech is progressing, I'm not exactly sure the length of time I can remain positive that my significantly slower human writing and editing skills, are better.

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

Outside the UK? Sign up here.