I'm switching between "not bad" and "really good" with this one, haha.
I'll be honest, at first I didn't really understand what the transcript was about. From the first few sentences and all the mechanical lingo, I thought the implication was that some woman had fused with an anomalous machine or something. After rereading the "first discovered" part, it makes a bit more sense. On to the critique.
I feel like you have a couple too many concepts here. "Giant Machine Protista"? Alright sure, cool. "Giant Machine Protista fed old american films"? Yeah, I mean, why not. But it's also unaffected by gravity? That's a bit much, isn't it? Not to mention that none of these facts imply that it's extradimensional or cannot be measured, yet the sentence "RPC-791's mass is impossible to measure" is in there and it's an Epsilon.
Moving on to the execution, I think there are a lot of problems in the description of this one. The article is written like we have a manual for the thing - so much information on it, with almost no mention of what tests (or how many tests) were done to get that information. Obviously not every article needs testing logs, but if you're not even going to acknowledge the existence of any tests, then sentences like "PC-791's level of intelligence will fluctuate according to the health and efficiency of its cells" stick out like a sore thumb. Right after that, the whole part about its antigravity is weird: Something hovering in the air isn't "being unaffected by gravitational forces", and one part of it pushing the other parts down isn't "being temporarily affected by gravitational forces" either.
Of course, there are also minor issues here, like the lack of any hazard tags and some spelling errors, but those aren't a big deal. I think the main thing here is that there's just too much going on here, conceptually. It needs to be simplified - even just cutting the implications of anything extradimensional and just adding some more talk of tests being done would improve this one by a huge amount.