>> An argument against simulation is that our universe seems gratuitously large. Why have billions of whole other galaxies in it? Given a finite computing budge

>> An argument against simulation is that our universe seems gratuitously large. Why have billions of whole other galaxies in it? Given a finite computing budget, you'd expect whoever's running the simulation to want to simulate more planets with civilization and fewer giant dust clouds. What if the simulation is done in a way like we render video game graphics. We never render stuff that is not "visible", well mostly to spare GPU and CPU cycles. What stops a super advanced simulation to simulate only stuff we can "see" or stuff we observe. If no one is looking at the Andromeda galaxy, no simulation needs to "render" it, saving processing cycles. Or maybe, the nature of the probabilistic aspects of quantum physics is an indication that that the simulators are trying to simulate in a "lossy" way, kind of like MP3 vs FLAC files.