Its all pop pseudoscience. Things exist. Anything that exists has an identity. Physics exists and other things (simulations, computing, etc.) that exist are subject to those physics. To say that it happens the other way around is poor logic and/or lacks falsifiability.

>Things exist

oh, cogito existo sum! checkmate theists!

dude, the simulation hypothesis does not mean things don't exist, it means they don't necessarily exist in the way you have, rather unimaginatively, imagined, and you have no way to tell.

and Occam's Razor does not solve the problem.

> … and you have no way to tell. This is exactly my point. If we have no way to tell, what experiment could you possibly use to test whether we’re in a simulation or not? The simulation hypothesis lacks falsifiability and is pseudoscience.

the "it's not a simulation" hypothesis lacks falsifiability.

also, falsifiability lacks falsifiability.

don't make up complex axioms and then believe in them on faith.

Occam's razor: if the universe can be simulated, then whatever form the simulation takes is the simpler explanation for the turtles all the way down.

if the universe can't be simulated, explain how you know that.

eh, its possible that weird shit is happening in physics. however, there is no evidence that this is the case. its just vibes, really.