That’s already existed many times throughout history. For most of human history, in fact.

Those with the rights will simply continue to narrow who qualifies for rights until only a small ruling class has any.

Yes, and that is good. Look at the comments here. Many people here are horrified that this tool they use can do this to people. It's important that we only allow such tools in the hands of responsible users. I am one such, obviously. But as you can see, most people are fearful. We need to protect them.

> I am one such, obviously.

I declare you’re not. I need to protect you from yourself.

Well, I suppose it will rest on our ability in society to assert our will then. But for all the people who think this tech is too dangerous for people to use surely we can agree that if they think so, protecting them from it is something they should find gratifying.

"Well, I have the bigger gun so you don't get rights" is monstrous.

“I don’t want something so we should all be denied it” is definitely worse than my system of allowing people who can handle things to be allowed them.

The Amish got at least one thing right: sometimes the drawbacks of a technology do outweigh the benefits.

And so they deny themselves it. Here the ones who want it denied want to deny others it. Surely the simple thing is to deny it to those who think it’s bad and to allow it for those who think it’s good.

Then we can explore the broader bans.

I'm unsure if someone who declares themselves as "obviously" part of the ruling class is the type of person who should be ruling over anyone at all.

What I do, I do for the people. The terrible tool known as AI shall be limited to my use so that only I need suffer its presence while the rest of you glory on unburdened.