The way you use intend (even for your computer examples) really amounts to "follows the laws of physics" - it is almost empty of meaning.
Above, I say that a train "intends" to haul its load, but I'll correct myself. The robot's "intent" to find a green circle is not simply equivalent to a stone rolling downhill, any more than a germ cell mating with another germ cell to create a new cell with a unique pattern of DNA is simply equivalent to the stone, even if both the stone and the cells follow laws of physics. I'll call the mating "creative", but I wouldn't describe a stone rolling downhill this way.
Complexity matters. "Information processing" doesn't describe any matter in motion. It describes specific matter and specific motions. For that matter, a Turing machine doesn't require particular laws of physics at all. Turing machines can "exist" in a universe with entirely different "laws of physics", a "universe" of cellular automata (as in Conway's Game of Life) for example.
Right, but sometimes when confronted with real mysteries it is better to explore rather than try to deduce stuff logically.
I think the science of consciousness is at an equally primitive state.
Good - I have read that many people cope with their voices by themselves without invoking medical help and possibly being fed strong drugs. I hope things continue to go well for you.
... even if you call it an hallucination it must involve the coordinated effort of a lot of neurones.
Er, not exactly, psi research is poorly funded, and electromagnetically shielded rooms and the like don't come cheap.
Again lets not get wrapped up in semantics - the usual aim in telepathy experiments is to rule out communication by any known means.
... standard QM rules prevent information passing in entanglement experiments - the entanglement is only detected statistically when both sets of results are compared.
... a wave function whose point of collapse is extremely hard to settle, ...
A chemist tends to think of electrons as waves first, and particles second!
My feeling is that science tends to push trick problems under the carpet - the simple question, "what is consciousness" is certainly one of them.