Many times I've covered this topic in articles and videos, and while a cat only has nine lives this argument can be simulated an infinite amount of times. Seriously, if you have seen Simulation hypothesis 1 and Simulation hypothesis 2 there's very little here that will be new to you. Ive resurrected this body of work on the basis of a new sims game launching this month.
Nick Bostrom the Director of Oxford Future of Humanity Institute wrote a paper in 2002 called ARE YOU LIVING IN A COMPUTER SIMULATION?
1)Almost no civilization will reach a technological level capable of producing simulated realities.
For this argument to be correct it would mean that reaching a technological singularity is somehow restricted by the physical laws of the universe.
On the other hand this argument may be true if the size of the universe was infinite. This would also imply that our current observable universe is just a "local" membrane or bubble. Why is the size of the universe a deterrent? Well, if the universe is truly infinite then it would take a computer with infinite computational ability to simulate the entire universe.
2)Almost no civilization reaching aforementioned technological status will produce a simulated reality, for any of a number of reasons, such as diversion of computational processing power for other tasks, ethical considerations of holding entities captive in simulated realities, etc.
On the other hand it, can be seen that giving the gift of life whether it's virtual or not is still a gift. The lifeforms that possess the technology, most likely artilects, could see creating life in simulation as only a natural part of existence, especially if they themselves are simulated.
This one is a very difficult one to argue, yet at the same time it is what most religions have told us about the true nature of the universe. In Hinduism our physical existence is called maya or an illusion. Is the illusion that we are simulations the concept that has been passed down by the ancients?
COMPUTER END PROGRAM