There is something quietly exhausting about being asked to decide all the time. From the moment we wake up, choices await us; what to wear, what to eat, what to prioritize. The digital world, far from easing this burden, adds more. Tabs multiply. Notifications pile up. And beneath it all is the persistent pressure to make the right call.
Even something as mundane as visiting a café becomes a small test of will. Standing in line at a place like Starbucks, we’re often faced with a dizzying list of decisions: tall or grande, oat milk or soy, double shot or not? It looks empowering on the surface, but it often feels like a minor ambush. Sometimes, all we want is a quiet place, a warm drink, and a bit of time to think or talk. In those moments, the “coffee of the day” isn’t just a choice; it’s a gift. It’s one less decision to make.
This subtle fatigue extends into our use of technology. The more powerful our tools become, the more choices they seem to demand. And the irony is, these tools were supposed to make life easier.
When Intelligence Becomes a Burden
Generative AI is one of the most impressive inventions of our time. It can write, draw, analyze, code, and respond in ways that feel increasingly human. But as it grows smarter, we’re beginning to feel something unexpected: a burden not of ignorance, but of choice.
Ask anyone using AI tools today, and they’ll likely mention confusion about which model to use. Should it be ChatGPT-4.1? Or maybe 4.5? Or perhaps just GPT-4o? What about the o3 and o4 models quietly powering other applications? Each has strengths, quirks, and use cases, but most users aren’t product testers. They just want answers, not a decision tree.
The reality is that choosing between models has become its own kind of work. And this complexity is compounded by the fact that benchmarks and features change so frequently that keeping up feels like a full-time job.
This isn’t just an inconvenience. It quietly erodes trust. If I can’t tell which version is best for me, am I even getting the most out of what I’m paying for, or what I need?
The Market of Explanations
What makes this even more revealing is the ecosystem that has grown around these choices. Today, entire YouTube channels and blogs are dedicated to explaining the differences between ChatGPT-4.1 and 4.5, or comparing Claude Opus to Gemini Advanced. These content creators offer walkthroughs, rankings, and benchmarks, like sports commentators for AI performance.
It’s not that their work is unimportant. In fact, it’s incredibly valuable. But the very existence of this “market of explanations” is telling. People are now seeking explanations of the explanations, just to figure out what their tools are capable of.
We’ve reached a strange moment when intelligence is everywhere, but clarity is scarce. Users shouldn’t have to consult influencers just to know what button to press or what model to use. It’s a signal that the system has become too layered for its own good.
The Limits of “Empowering the User”
There’s a belief in tech circles that giving users more control always leads to better experiences. But in practice, this often becomes a quiet burden. Every option added, every toggle exposed, shifts a little more responsibility onto the user’s shoulders.
Even when companies offer choices with good intentions, the emotional impact can be one of quiet pressure. Should I toggle this setting? Should I upgrade to this version? Am I missing out?
This pressure wears people down. It turns everyday interaction into micro-strategy. It makes people feel like they’re failing if they don’t optimize every interaction.
What most of us really want is not more power; it’s more relief. We want a product to feel like a safe place, not a puzzle to solve.
Judgment-as-a-Service
This is why the next real innovation in AI might not be about model performance, but about judgment; the ability to make good decisions for us. Not in the way that takes away our agency, but in a way that allows us to rest.
Imagine asking a question without needing to know which model, version, or plugin will work best. Imagine the AI simply doing what’s most helpful, because it quietly understood your context, your intent, and the surrounding situation.
This is what “judgment-as-a-service” could mean. An AI layer that manages the complexity for us. That selects, tunes, and routes things in the background so we don’t have to.
If we look forward to the arrival of GPT-5 onwards, perhaps the most meaningful improvement wouldn’t be just in speed or intelligence, but in unification. A model that can adapt without exposing its complexity. One that folds all past versions into the backend, leaving users with one simple question: “How can I help?”
When Integration Becomes Clutter
Many tech companies eventually try to solve complexity by consolidation. They take multiple tools and wrap them into one “platform.” But this often results in a single product that feels like a collection of small battles stitched together.
Product managers are still assigned to their own areas. Each has targets to hit, ideas to push, metrics to move. And so features accumulate. Panels appear. Settings multiply.
From the outside, it looks like unification. From the inside, it’s just cohabitation.
For the user, this is no better than having many apps. It’s like being handed a toolbox where every drawer is packed, but nothing feels designed for what you’re actually doing.
The Subtle Danger of Oversimplification
While complexity frustrates, oversimplification can quietly betray trust. There’s a kind of design that tries too hard to be clever. A one-button interface that says nothing. A toggle switch labeled with a 1 and a 0. A clean screen that gives no hint of what’s possible.
Minimalism without meaning leads to confusion. Users don’t feel smart when they use these interfaces; they feel unsure. And uncertainty drains focus.
Simplicity must be felt, not just seen. It’s about creating a sense of direction, not just reducing elements. The best simplicity brings peace, not mystery.
The Philosophy of Thoughtful Design
Design is not just about what’s added or removed. It’s about what the user experiences. The most thoughtful products are those that understand us, not just as users, but as people with limited time, emotional bandwidth, and cognitive energy.
Thoughtful design makes the right decision feel obvious. It helps without interrupting. It explains just enough. It fades when not needed, but is clear when called upon.
This is a deeper kind of intelligence. One rooted in empathy and restraint. It says: you don’t need to learn us; we’ve learned you. And in that, we feel not just served, but understood.
The Future We Actually Want
Most of us aren’t asking for more features or more control. We’re asking for more peace. We want our tools to help us get through the day without making us feel lost or anxious or behind.
What we long for isn’t artificial intelligence. It’s natural ease.
Imagine AI that listens closely, chooses wisely, and explains clearly. Imagine one model that just works, no matter what the task is. One that can write, summarize, think, assist, and adapt, not by making us choose, but by choosing well for us.
That’s the future we’re quietly hoping for. Not louder. Not faster. Just kinder. And maybe, just maybe, GPT-5 onwards could be that beginning.
Image: A photo captured by the author
Tom’s Blog 