I don't know what the threshold for a terrible description is, but I certainly think that the software description of consciousness is very deceiving.
This is a good article addressing that: http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2012/05/04/why-your-brain-isnt-a-computer/
Most of the phenomena he points to in this review do not actually tell against the computational theory of mind in any obvious way. How does cognitive dissonance or confirmation bias tell against the computational theory? He says that they're hard to model mathematically--though I'm not sure why they're supposed to be harder than anything else--but even if that's so, the computational theory of mind is committed to the idea that the mental is computational, not to the idea that the mental is easy to model.
His better argument goes by way of pointing out the functionally relevant dissimilarities between the physical structure of the brain and the physical structure of a computer. Brains are resilient to damage partially because they likely run as massively distributed parallel processors rather than single serial processors. This has been a point that anti-computationalists (e.g. connectionists) have long wielded against computationalists--they thought their theory was in better harmony with actual neural structure and function. But, as has been pointed out by computationalists in response, it is a mathematical fact about connectionists networks that they can be used to run a Turing machine. By allowing that's what's going on, the computationalist can assimilate all the data about neural function, allowing that it is connectionist in nature, while still maintaining that everything occurring at the level of cognition is computational. --And if that's the real story, then, if anything, we have a strong vindication of the hardware/software metaphor.
The fact that you can model a brain in a computer does not detract from the fact that in the case of the brain there is no separate hardware and software. The hardware determines the software and in order to change the software you must change the hardware. You can't, for example, swap minds with a person without swapping the physical configurations of their brains (and likely most of their bodies, since off-brain neural networks and hormones are a thing.
Do you think software is magic? You talk like software isn't a physical thing arising from its physical form in your computer--like your memories in your brain.
Software is exactly as inextricably a part of the computer as your memories; when you 'move' data on a computer, you just destroy its physical form in one place and make a copy of it elsewhere. It's not some magic substance flowing around inside your computer and through the tubes of hte internet.
I don't think I agree with the assumption that sleep is a cessation of existence. It's just a thing you do where you lay still and don't move a bunch. Your still existing, your just taking care of other things temporarily. Just because you are pre-occupied doesn't mean your not existing anymore, otherwise you could make an argument that if you are busy eating you aren't existing.