> Any reasonable definition of consciousness should IMO be a continuum, so your laptop has some consciousness (not very much). That doesn't seem much different

> Any reasonable definition of consciousness should IMO be a continuum, so your laptop has some consciousness (not very much). That doesn't seem much different from the theory of consciousness Chalmers put forward in the second part of his 1996 book, where some law of nature connects consciousness to rich streams of information. That way, any physical system which creates a complex enough flow of information would be conscious to some degree. The difference is that Chalmers recognizes that information and subjective experience are not equivalent, and thus you need a law of nature connecting the too. That was his proposal for expanding science. I'm not saying whether he's write or wrong, only that Chalmers recognizes the hard problem can't be waved away by making an equivalence claim.