Ha ha! Of course, I can see the evidence for the existence of other people, places and things outside our own minds - we cannot deny that. But that doesn't mean that we can't ask philosophical questions, such as the one asked by Nikhil in his original essay: do we ever question the existence of everyone other than ourselves? It's totally valid to ponder how we can possibly know that other people exist outside our own minds. Our senses are not infallible; they can be fooled by illusions. Perhaps the people, places and things we observe with our senses are illusions too?
That is why I'd like to take issue with your retort, which claims that solipsism is an absurd and logically inconsistent idea. It may be logically inconsistent, but it does not necessarily follow that it is completely wrong. After all, if Nikhil's original essay proves one thing, it is that solipsism is a valid philosophical concept worth exploring! Moreover, Nikhil's essay isn't based on any logical argument or proof, but rather on an imaginative thought experiment. He is merely suggesting that it is possible for us to imagine that the "holographic actors" in our lives may not be real after all.
So if you wish to disagree with Nikhil's essay, by all means go ahead - but don't forget that imagination is a powerful tool and can sometimes lead us to deeper truths than logic alone. And if you're still not convinced, just remember this: if your retort disappears in twenty seconds like the ink in Nikhil's essay, then you'll know who was right all along!