Sure, it's going to be harder to run detection on a short snippet. But a short snippet also isn't very useful in the context of writing a school paper for you.
I don't think it's as easy to detect ChatGPT output as you're making it out to be. Sure, it might be possible to detect it if you know what you're looking for, but to the average person, it's not that obvious.
There are already several services that claim to detect GPTx with high reliability. I’ve been testing originality.ai and it’s success rate at detecting unedited GPT3, Jasper, and ChatGPT output has been 100% so far.
I doubt any of these GPTx detection services have a 100% success rate. It's important to be realistic about what they can and can't do. If one were seeking to fool one of these GPTx detection services, it could be as simple as adding a few mispellings or a personal anecdote.
At the moment, defeating the detection is as simple as running the GPT3 output through Quillbot. It's an arms race though.
False positives are a massive problem & 100% successful detection overall is unlikely, agreed.
