Dualism without hard distinction?

I may think that the hard problem is best viewed thru the framework of it originator.  I am comfortable in the positions taken.  Here is commentary about the two (Bateson and Chalmers). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4243501/

OK, an argument by reassertion. I guess we can't go anywhere from there.

The context in which Bateson's quote is profound, was its timing.  The unit of measure of communication transmission and data storage had just "hit the scene".  A binary digit - THE Bit - (and Bytes) was defined as the answer to a "yes / no" question.  (Circuit open vs circuit closed)  Hence, his difference is just that -- a definitive and specified structural relation.

Are you surprised that the "hard problem" was generated from an information science viewpoint?

A "definitive and specified structural relation" is data or information, something that is of a fundamentally different existential nature than mind and qualia. Unless you can explain how the properties or aspects of consciousness such as qualia can literally be information pure and simple.    

True confession; I am with DC all the way till the last sentence ("On this theory then, information actually is—has the property of being—conscious.").  For me - information, both semantic and formal (bits) - is the stuff processed by mind.

Still leaves unanswered what is the ultimate nature of this mind, since mind isn't itself "stuff" of any kind.