No need, I don't see a point to this, I expect given 3-5 years of adversarial training if left unregulated they'll be completely impossible to tell apart to a level where there'd be any point to it, we need to learn to adapt to the fact AI writing is poised to replace human writing in anything not requiring logical reasoning

Edit: I'd add that we need to start thinking as a species about the fact we've reached the point where human labour need not apply, there are now automatic ways to do nearly everything, the only thing stopping us is the will to use them and resources being concentrated rather than distributed, assuming plentiful resources nearly everything CAN be done without human intervention.

Which is a 26% success rate, how is that being misrepresented? The fact its 'somewhat confident' on other samples means nothing, if this was to be used for validating articles anywhere like writing competitions or academia you'd want that "very confident" number to be in the high 90s or at the very least the false positive amount incredibly low.