“Trying to find out if we live in a computer simulation may greatly increase the chances that we live inside a computer simulation.”
This may sound crazy at first, but in the end, it's a quite simple conclusion that will even be true if we don't live in a simulation right now.
The argument logic is as follows:
Trying to find out if we live in a computer simulation means that we will also try to understand how such a simulation could work, in order to find "weak spots" that could possibly reveal the simulation's true nature.
The effort to understand how our own simulation could work leads to new insights, making it actually more probable that we will one day be able to develop a simulation on our own, using the least possible efforts and resources – and it is also plausible to think that other species would do the same, or would already have done this in the past.
So trying to find out if we live in a computer simulation may actually indirectly spark the development of future simulations, which will increase the number of simulations vs. the number of "real universes".
So if we'd like to avoid living in a computer simulation, then it may be better to stop thinking about this option all along.
In the end, even efforts such as this website could potentially increase the chances that we live in a simulation ourselves.
I first published this paradox in March 2020. I don't know if anyone else published this (or a similar) paradox before.