No no no. Consciousness requires an organic sensory system. Artifical Intelligence should be called Artifical Interpreters. We are Organic Interpreters. We are very similar but the consciousness isn't the interpretation of the reality we don't see (similar to common computers users not directly observing binary), consciousness is the ability to experience "reality" ( I prefer a redefined version of the word information, so here i use quotes to hint at what people would call maybe the basic foundation of a universe or the "binary" of the universe ) through organic senses. For now the A.I's sensory system is developed by humans. Of course machine learning has a potential for robots developing there own sensory systems, for now they are limited. Difference between inorganic and organic sensor systems are only marked by our development and knowledge of our own sensory systems. For example, we as a species developed eyes and hands and we didn't really have intentions on growing eyes and hands, evolution gave them to us. But once we became aware of our senses, we could begin to exploit them. This is what technology is. An exploitation of sensory systems. Glasses for exploiting vision, speakers exploiting our hearing ability, even things like oxygen tanks essentially are exploiting our knowledge of our own biological systems. Now that we are aware, we lose some of that authenticity that developed the eye. Its a new designer now. Nature doesn't sculpt the technological evolution as much as the biological one, unless you consider us nature, which id just change the wording from nature to something else so ill say nature here for now unless there's someone looking for me to define nature.
My definition of information is "that which can be interpreted"
Anything that can be intepreted, hand gestures, these words, language, morse code, binary, facial expressions, wind blowing in your hair at a certain speed and temperature. All of that can be interpreted, again just like these words here.