Oh look, another completely retarded article that doesn't even bother to note or deal with the definition problem. If you don't define what you mean by the term, your argument isn't even wrong, it is just a waste of everyone's time, since there are multiple highly conflicting aspects of and/or definitions of consciousness.
It defines consciousness as an
>observer-dependent model, subject to social consensus.
Which is actually more pragmatic than most conflicting philosophical definitions involving qualia and other handwavy concepts.