I think it is not a problem unless you make it so. Of course we can't exactly know what's going on in someone else's experience, but we know other experiences exist, and that they aren't all drastically different when biological factors are the same.

I still don't understand what is so problematic about not being able to access someone else's experience. It just seems to be the very point of consciousness that it's unique to every individual system, and that you can't inhabit another living thing without destroying both. Consciousness reflects outwards. It is evident in reactions. For me, arguing about consciousness totally outside reality and real world situations is not the way to understand the purpose and nature of it. It's like thinking about whether AI will ever grow a human body and if we will be able to notice when it does.

 One thing that irks me in the philosophical debate about consciousness is that it's always considered as some magical otherworldly thing. Not being able to solve the "hard problem of consciousness", one guy turns to panspsychism where everything has a consciousness (so nothing is explained really), or it is some emergent attribute that arises from mere living matter, as if living matter itself isn't special.

  To me, consciousness seems to be a biological fact among, pretty verifiably, many animals. So there is likely evolutionary benefits in being conscious to various degrees. And it makes sense: when there's a complicated life form, it's easier for it to make quick decicisions with a central hub that controls most of the functions instantaneously. If it just reacted with other systems unaware what others are doing, it could lead to contradictionary courses of action.

 Anyway, what the philosophical accounts of the ontological nature of consciousness rarely seem to address, is that it is something that has developed over time, concurrently with others, and in an environment that is partly social, partly hostile, and requires sometimes quick decicisions to be made in order to ensure survival. It is not a magical metaphysical quirk in the universe.

  So at last, regarding artificial consciousness: I can't escape the feeling that the framework for it to happen needs to have some of the same elements present that natural evolution of consciousness had:

1. need for self-preservation,

2. need to react to outside stimuli

3. others

List isn't probably exhaustive, but these are my thoughts and just wanted to put them somewhere.

This Vermeer is like the Wonderwall of paintings

Zoom in. Pretty much all realistic drawings benefit greatly from being shrunken in size on a screen. If you looked at the actual drawing you wouldn't think it's a photograph. Because it's not. And this is a photograph, of the drawing, with it's size manipulated.