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

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

Yet it was entirely composed by AI, with a few easy prompts about me supplied by my pal Janet.

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

It mimics my chatty style of writing, but it's also a bit repetitive, and extremely verbose. It might have exceeded Janet's triggers in collating data about me.

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

There's likewise a mysterious, repetitive hallucination in the form of my cat (I have no pets). And there's a metaphor on practically 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 called the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had offered around 150,000 personalised books, generally in the US, given 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 firm uses 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 - only Janet, who created it, can order any more copies.

There is presently no barrier to anyone producing one in any person's name, consisting of stars - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer specifying that it is fictional, produced by AI, and designed "exclusively to bring humour and joy".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the company, but Mr Mashiach stresses that the product is planned as a "customised gag gift", and the books do not get sold even more.

He hopes to widen his range, generating different categories such as sci-fi, and maybe providing an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted form of consumer AI - offering AI-generated goods to human consumers.

It's also a bit frightening if, like me, ratemywifey.com you write for a living. Not least since it most likely took less than a minute to produce, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound just like me.

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

"We must be clear, when we are talking about data here, we actually imply 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 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 vocalists Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social networks before being pulled from streaming platforms because it was not their work and they had actually not granted it. It didn't stop the track's creator attempting to nominate it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were phony, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not think the usage of generative AI for creative functions should be banned, however I do think that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without consent need to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be extremely powerful but let's develop it morally and relatively."

OpenAI states Chinese competitors using its work for 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 - consisting of the BBC - have picked to obstruct AI designers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have actually decided to team up - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for greyhawkonline.com example.

The UK government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would allow AI developers to use creators' material on the web to assist develop their designs, unless the rights pull out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "insanity".

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 messing up the livelihoods of the nation's creatives," he argues.

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

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

"The federal government is undermining one of its best carrying out industries on the unclear pledge of growth."

A federal government spokesperson stated: "No relocation will be made until we are definitely positive we have a practical plan that provides each of our objectives: increased control for best holders to assist them accredit their content, access to premium product to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more openness for right holders from AI developers."

Under the UK federal government's brand-new AI plan, a nationwide data library containing public information from a large variety of sources will also be offered to AI researchers.

In the US the future of federal guidelines to control AI is now up in the air following President Trump's go back to the presidency.

In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that aimed to increase the safety of AI with, among other things, companies in the sector needed to share information of the workings of their systems with the US federal government before they are launched.

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

This comes as a variety of claims against AI firms, and particularly against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been secured by everyone from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.

They claim that the AI companies broke the law when they took their content 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 therefore exempt. There are a variety of aspects which can make up fair use - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it gathers training information and whether it ought to be spending for it.

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

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

As for me and a career as an author, I believe that at the minute, if I actually want a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, forum.altaycoins.com Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weak point in generative AI tools for bigger projects. It has plenty of errors and hallucinations, and it can be rather difficult to read in parts since it's so long-winded.

But offered how quickly the tech is developing, I'm unsure the length of time I can remain positive that my considerably slower human writing and editing skills, are better.

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

Outside the UK? Sign up here.