He solves it himself in the article: "So the proposition that consciousness is computation leads quite inevitably to an extreme panpsychism. Even if we could st

He solves it himself in the article: "So the proposition that consciousness is computation leads quite inevitably to an extreme panpsychism. Even if we could stomach a traditional conception of panpsychism that posits that all things are conscious in some primitive way, this goes far beyond that. We are forced to conclude that all things aren’t just vaguely conscious, but they contain all consciousnesses, including our own!" Yes, so why can't panpsychism be correct? It's far more intuitive than postulating some magical qualia substance that permeates the universe (or however that's supposed to work).