For Christmas I received an interesting present from a buddy - my very own "best-selling" book.

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (great title) bears my name and my picture on its cover, and asteroidsathome.net it has radiant reviews.

Yet it was totally written by AI, with a few simple triggers about me provided by my buddy Janet.

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

It mimics my chatty style of composing, wiki.die-karte-bitte.de but it's likewise a bit repeated, and very verbose. It may have gone beyond Janet's triggers in collating data about me.

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

There's also a mystical, repeated hallucination in the type of my cat (I have no family pets). And there's a metaphor on nearly every page - some more random than others.

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

When I called the chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually sold around 150,000 customised 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 costs ₤ 26. The company utilizes its own AI tools to create them, based on an open source big language model.

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

There is presently no barrier to anybody creating one in any person's name, consisting of celebs - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book contains a printed disclaimer stating that it is fictional, developed by AI, and created "solely to bring humour and joy".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the firm, but Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is intended as a "customised gag gift", and the books do not get sold further.

He wants to expand his range, creating various categories such as sci-fi, and possibly using an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted type of consumer AI - selling AI-generated products to human consumers.

It's also a bit terrifying if, like me, you write for a living. Not least since it probably took less than a minute to generate, it-viking.ch and akropolistravel.com it does, definitely in some parts, sound similar to me.

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

"We should be clear, when we are talking about data here, we in fact imply human developers' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI firms to respect creators' rights.

"This is books, this is articles, this is images. It's artworks. It's records ... The whole point of AI training is to find out how to do something and after that do more like that."

In 2023 a tune featuring AI-generated voices of Drake and surgiteams.com The Weeknd went viral on social networks before being pulled from streaming platforms since 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 king-wifi.win despite the fact that the artists were fake, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not think the use of generative AI for imaginative purposes should be prohibited, but I do think that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without authorization need to be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be really effective but let's develop it morally 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 actually chosen to block AI developers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have chosen to collaborate - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for instance.

The UK government is considering an overhaul of the law that would permit AI designers to use creators' content on the internet to help develop their designs, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

He mentions that AI can make advances in areas like defence, healthcare 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 livelihoods of the nation's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, is also highly 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 a consultant to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The government is undermining among its best performing markets on the unclear pledge of growth."

A government representative stated: "No relocation will be made up until we are absolutely positive we have a useful plan that provides each of our goals: increased control for best holders to help them certify their material, access to premium material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more transparency for best holders from AI developers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI plan, a national data library including public information from a wide variety of sources will likewise be made available 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 boost the security of AI with, to name a few things, firms in the sector needed to share details of the functions of their systems with the US federal government before they are released.

But this has actually now been reversed by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do instead, but he is said to desire the AI sector to face less guideline.

This comes as a number of claims against AI firms, and it-viking.ch particularly versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been taken out by everybody from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comic.

They declare that the AI companies broke the law when they took their material from the internet without their consent, and utilized 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 elements which can constitute reasonable use - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing analysis over how it gathers training data and whether it should be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek claims that it developed its innovation for a fraction of the price of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's present dominance of the sector.

As for me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the minute, if I truly desire a "bestseller" I'll still have to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weakness in generative AI tools for bigger tasks. It is full of inaccuracies and hallucinations, and it can be rather difficult to read in parts due to the fact that it's so long-winded.

But provided how rapidly the tech is developing, I'm uncertain the length of time I can remain confident that my substantially slower human writing and editing skills, are better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the most significant advancements in international technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents around the world.

Outside the UK? Register here.