Well, defining the "hard problem" hasn't gotten us any closer to understanding consciousness in the last 22 years. The hard problem just moves consciousness problem into an unfruitful direction. It's time for more practical approaches.
I think attempts to rule out physicalism with arguments about qualia and such have gotten us nowhere, and I have no problem with studying game theory and experimenting with reinforcement learning, but the idea that these alone will fully explain consciousness is conjecture at this point - a conjecture that I, personally, am not ready to make.
Quite a few people on either side of the physicalism - dualism debate seem to be more keen on declaring victory and cutting off further discussion than they are in getting to the bottom of the issue.
BTW, on Searle's 'Chinese Room' argument, I have always been in the 'the system as a whole would be conscious' camp.
Not sure where your 22 years estimate comes from. I think man has been trying to understand it for much longer maybe thousands of years ? - and has found answers through techniques that are outside of the mind - such as meditation.
From an empirical standpoint, meditation gives us no information whatsoever. Just thinking about something will not lead you to some sort of mystically revealed truth
