Yes.

I'm not really sure what you attempting to oppose posit here. Those concepts are not mutually exclusive.

Nihilism isn't the belief in nothing. Nihilism is the belief that regardless of what's there, it doesn't matter.

That's the natural next step to what I proposed IMO.

Assuming that we live in a simulation, and that individuals do in fact have sentience and sapience within the simulation... how do you leave? Putting your effective neurology in a robot with even more sensors to tell us how things are in reality? It is insanely optimistic to assume a Matrix style simulation where when it gets pulled we remain individuals with some form of body to use outside. Occum's Razor would have me believe that the simplest simulation involves individuals being entirely "circuitry" or whatever form is used. Taking the red pill might well be the same as pulling a highly advanced GPU out of a computer, tossing on the floor, and assuming it's still a living person.

I dislike the simulation theories for the same reason I'm an aetheist. Their impracticality knows no bounds. You can theoretically put an infinite number of Wrappers around concepts, but if they are not testable, what's the point?

Let's not fall prey to different forms of Roko's Basilisk.

Nihilism: Nothing matters, it's all pointless.

Pessimistic Nihilism: Nothing matters, why try?

Optimistic Nihilism: Nothing matters, and it's liberating.

Might I suggest the bottom ideology?