I suppose I can consider myself a weak computationalist. I think a computer running a human mind will generate qualia, if it's a simple enough computer. After all, you could interpret a rock in such a way that it's a computer running a human mind.

It's the algorithm that matters.

1. c, or at least I don't understand the distinction.
2. Any sufficiently simple Turing machine. Since there's nothing that can clearly be called the output, if you didn't limit it in some way, you could say that a clock is a Turing machine if you map each time to the state the Turing machine would have at that time.
3. A function was given two inputs that map to two by a sufficiently simple mapping. The result of the function tends to be the sum. In this case, it maps to four.
4. You could have an image-recognition program that involves computations about the color red. It would generate a qualia distinct from what it calls "green". I very much doubt it would resemble the qualia of red you feel. In fact, I doubt we even have the same qualia for red.
5. Algorithms, although at some point you get to steps where it's just functions.
6. What do you mean by "consciousness"? If you mean that it generates qualia, yes. If you mean intelligence, of course not. You could run an intelligent program on Conway's Game of Life.
7. Yes.
8. I'd say all, but not all equally conscious.