https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12878939
there are no challenges, and even simple numbers can be conscious. we have sequenced DNA today, you can download it right now: http://www.sanger.ac.uk/resources/downloads/human/
After downloading it go ahead and take a checksum.
within 500 years (a ridiculous overestimation) someone will build a simulation that simulates (emulates) part of the brain that is described in that genome. Whether at full speed or one-tenth speed it will be done, and for test purposes someone might do it in a determinstic VM of sorts. They can take that checksum, let's say it's:
3ad235db427e566bbb31097c77882d20f30db779ff8f3896cb35bb43ebf76dd164e084109bf2bcb8a9ba1bc7477c1eeb3dfcf699bc3f8e7f4d96aceeaa080003
(That's an SHA-512 hash).
I'll tell you what I hashed. All I hashed was "I'm a brain".
Instead of a text string, within 500 years someone will hash a VM that contains as much data as a human brain, is human for practical purposes, and reports the same thing.
For me personally, this is beyond even discussion and I personally consider the matter closed. However, at hte HN link at the top of this comment I report a state of affairs under which I would be wrong. I don't consider it even worth thinking about though.
I don't consider any question around this area to be "open". We just have to accept what we deduced.
if you don't like it or don't agree with it, you can wait until someone simulates an adult brain reporting self-consciousness, and then you will be forced to say, "oh well, I was wrong."
There is no conceivable scenario under which I would have to say, "oh well, I was wrong." (Above, I outline such a scenario though. It's not going to happen.)