>>12145145brainlet cope.
As a theoretical comp sci dude (working on some big research, I'll let you guys know when I get published), there are many questions that kinda destroy that line of reasoning.
1) What kind of computational model is it? Deterministic TM, Quantum TM, Super TM?? Super Duper TM? Continuous tape TM? It doesn't tell us anything about the nature of reality.
2) If we do live in a simulation, how do we empirically verify that? We can't.
3) If we could verify it, can we leave and go to the 'real world'? if not, then the simulation is the only thing we'll ever know. If so, can we go back? Can we know about the 'real world'?
4) It still doesn't answer deep fundamental questions, it just moves the problem to the creators of the simulation. Even if we know their motivation for creating our universe, what is the backbone of their reality? Simulations all the way down? Why does the 'real world' exist instead of nothing?
There are many other questions along the same lines as the ones stated above, but the bottom line is that it causes more questions than it answers.
