This is a good article to have, generally speaking. Two problems leapt out at me, though: one rational, and one ethical. On the rationality end, he clearly sounds like he wants the whole thing to be bull. For instance:

Good, I thought. Maybe Marcus would demolish the Singularity and leave nothing behind but smoking wreckage.

So I imagined Marcus would declare the human brain unimprovable. He came out onto the stage and began to explain the shortfalls of human memory. So far, so good. But then he proceeded to explain why memory's failings meant that it was a good place to start improving the human brain. I had lost another skeptic.

From the ethics perspective:

Koene offered some reasons for why anyone would want to work so hard to make a whole-brain emulation in the first place. Even if it just behaved like a generic human brain rather than my brain or yours in particular, scientists could still use it to run marvelous new kinds of experiments. They might test drugs for depression, Parkinson's and other disorders.

I realize this is not currently happening, but the way this was worded sounds like "let's create someone as a brain in a jar and do experiments on her without thinking of her as a person at all."