I have been intuitively leaning towards a similar view of consciousness for a couple of years (so I am pretty sure it is not very radical). But, as the Wired article states (and indeed drifts toward now and then), a discussion thereof can lead into quite "alternative" territory because of the general danger of discussing the mind. Glad to see a (prominent?) Neuroscientist discussing it. Means there will be a lot of interesting things to learn, and perhaps some scientific angle to the theory is in the works to either rule it out or show that it may be possible.
A neuroscientist's radical theory of how networks become conscious Wired UK.
By the way, regarding the argument "Why isn't X conscious, but only humans are?" It is not sure we know, or that we could communicate with other conscious entities (which is the most straightforward way of detection). There may not be enough connectivity yet. And finally, could we really expect to communicate with an entity we are part of? These are mathematical properties. The bottom line I think, is that consciousness is an illusion of complexity in the entity who believes itself to be conscious. To an observer having knowledge of the full operation - a measure.
Anyway, ties in with computing quite nicely.
I'll try to get some of my musings up at some point soon (or probably later).