A framework for conceptual ideas is provided, but within this lengthy quantity of words, not much else is accomplished other than to admit that consiousness is safely a material reality.
A comment is provided criticizing the article as usual, not much else is accomplished other than unintentionally admitting that the commenter doesn't really understand the gigantic difficulty of the problem at hand.
Eh, to be clear, this anatomical identification of the various attributes of sapience( dialing in on its approximate residence within systems matter, somewhere between the quantum and newtonian realms), rings mostly of opening remarks, and not the climactic declaration of a new discovery.
It's foundational writing pointing toward more to come, if it's anything.
