Would we be able to tell if a general conference talk was AI?
We have no idea how much the speakers will use AI to help write their talks, if at all. But I'm afraid that even if they don't use any, people will accuse them of giving AI talks anyways. I've seen lots of complaints recently that General Conference has been a generic message for years now, and I think that a lot of things that we attribute to "AI speak" have actually been used in general conference for a long time. For example
"It is not about being fashionable. It is about being faithful. It is not about being cool. It is about being chaste and keeping covenants. It is not about being popular, but about being pure."
The "It's not A it's B" is one of the #1 things I look for in AI generated text, but this is from a 2007 talk called "Stay on the Path" by Elaine S. Dalton. There's also a lot of words like "myriad" that I never see in any conversation unless it is AI saying it, but it's used pretty often in General Conference, for example
"Have Faith in Jesus Christ As you study Christ's life and teachings in a myriad of ways, your faith in Him will increase." (Jean B. Bingham, 2017)
These are just toy examples and super small. But I think that if Dalton's talk came out this weekend people would accuse it of being AI and cite "it uses AI language and feels super generic." AI detectors aren't very good at detecting AI speech in general, and I really feel like on Monday or Tuesday next week someone is going to pick out a talk, claim it as AI, and a witch hunt will begin while people look for evidence of something not true that confirms their bias.
If someone made a talk with AI and gave it at general conference, is there any way we would be able to tell?