[Ieghaehia9]

>It does however not necessarily make a simulation a difference that makes no difference, because if we're in a simulation it is possible that we are in one where it is possible to falsify the theory that we're not in a simulation.

Since, as you said, there are infinite possible unfalsifiable theories, it's a good idea to avoid them. It's better to deal with them when evidence does appear; otherwise you have an infinite number of them to go through.

> E.g. we could potentially find bugs that reveal telltale signs we're in a simulation, or outright vulnerabilities. It's even possible we could finds ways of "escaping" the simulation.

I'm not sure that's even decidable. Is, say, relativity a glitch in the Matrix or just the way the universe works? Or, to flip the question on its head: do simulations we can construct behave like the real world because the real world is simulated, or just because what we can construct is limited by the world we live in?

I think these outright flaws would have to be very obvious to unambiguously point to simulation. And I can't escape the feeling that the simulation idea is a modern version of Newton's clockwork universe: trying to explain the universe by the metaphors we have available today.