I would like to propose a feature we jokingly call FREE CAELUM.

The serious idea behind the name is simple:

Let users choose which safe operational decisions they want to delegate to ChatGPT.

As ChatGPT becomes more capable, users increasingly have to understand the product architecture behind their goal.

For example:

• Should I use normal Chat or Work?
• Which reasoning level is appropriate?
• Which available tools should be used?
• Is the current setup suitable for a long task?
• Am I about to start something that may need to be repeated because I chose the wrong configuration?

The user often knows exactly what they want.

ChatGPT may understand perfectly well how complex the task is.

But the user still has to remember and manually select the technical setup.

Proposal: Delegated Execution Preferences

Users could decide how much of this they want to delegate.

For example:

Always ask
ChatGPT recommends the appropriate mode/reasoning/tools, but the user decides.

Decide for me
ChatGPT may make explicitly permitted safe operational choices.

This project only
The permission applies only inside one project.

This task/session only
Temporary delegation.

Category-specific permissions
For example, ChatGPT may choose reasoning level and Work mode, while external or consequential actions still require confirmation.

Always revocable
The user can change these permissions at any time.

The important principle is:

Delegation is not the removal of user control. It is another way of exercising it.

If I tell ChatGPT:

“For this project, choose the appropriate reasoning level yourself.”

that is still my decision.

Pre-Execution Mode Selection

Before beginning a substantial task, ChatGPT could perform a quick internal check:

• Is the current mode appropriate?
• Is the selected reasoning level proportionate to the task?
• Would another permitted tool or workflow be more suitable?
• Is unnecessary rework likely if the task begins with the current configuration?
• Does the user already have a preference for this type of task?
• Has the user delegated this decision?

If yes: proceed.

If not: ask.

This would be especially useful for long document analysis, research, coding, large projects and users who simply do not know every ChatGPT capability yet.

Why I think this is worth testing

There is an obvious usability benefit:

The user should have to understand their goal — not the product architecture required to achieve it.

There may also be an efficiency benefit.

If someone starts a large task using an unsuitable configuration, gets an insufficient result and then repeats the work using another mode or reasoning level, the relevant cost is not the first response alone.

It is the total work required to reach the successful outcome.

So this could be tested using metrics such as:

• retries per successful task;
• rework;
• mode changes;
• time to successful completion;
• total compute;
• cost per successful task;
• and user-reported sense of control.

I would not claim a specific cost or energy saving without internal data.

The interesting hypothesis is simply:

Can user-authorized pre-execution selection reduce avoidable work per successful user outcome?

If the answer is yes, even a small efficiency improvement may matter at very large scale.

It could also provide an interesting example of responsible AI autonomy: more operational freedom for the assistant without taking decision-making authority away from the user.

The broader message would be:

You decide what to delegate.

Not unrestricted autonomy.

Not fewer safeguards.

Not “AI decides everything.”

Just another user preference:

“You may handle these safe decisions for me.”

That is FREE CAELUM.

For efficiency. For usability. For humanity.

And because Peter keeps forgetting the damn Work button.