>The maximum speed a pixel in a virtual reality game can cross a screen is limited by the processing capacity of the computer running it.
No it isn't. Making an object move an arbitrarily large distance instantly (that is, from one simulation step to the next) is trivial. It's literally just changing a couple numbers.
All that processing power limits is how much simulation-time resolution you can add without hitting a real-time limit. For example, computer games should ideally be able to have a simulation-time resolution of 1/60 seconds without going over a limit of 1 real second. If you don't have a real-time limit, you can add as much resolution to the simulation as you want.
There's no technical reason for a simulation to have an absolute speed limit, so the existence of c tells you nothing.

>Digital processing. If a world is virtual, everything in it must be digitized, and so discrete at the lowest level.
Technically, if hypercomputation and infinite memory are involved, it's possible to have a digital system that behaves as if it was continuous.

>Plank’s discovery that light is quantized (as photons) could then generalize not only to charge, spin and matter, but also to space-time.
Why?

>If our universe is a three-dimensional “screen” it’s processing is “equidistant” to all points in the universe, so the non-local collapse of the quantum wave function could be such an effect.
It could also be the effect of something else entirely.

>Likewise a high matter concentration may constitute a high processing demand, so a massive body could slow down the information processing of space-time, causing space to “curve” and time to slow. Likewise, if faster movement requires more processing, speeds near light speed could affect space/time, causing time to “dilate” and space to extend. Relativity effects could then arise from local processing overloads.
This is just silly. Like I said earlier about c, there's no technical reason for the simulation of a physical system to behave in any particular way. If you have some part of the simulation that takes more time to process then you can simply spend more time on it before advancing to the next step in the simulation. Doing this is actually much simpler than what a hypothetical computer would need to do to make the universe behave the way it does.

>Our universe has not run down after an inconceivable number of microscopic interactions over 14+ billion years, so if it is made of information it must conserve it.
Well, this is wrong for two reasons.
First, it assumes that a value very close to zero is the same as zero. It's like saying that because you can always take another spoonful out of the ocean, that it must contain an infinite number of spoonfuls.
Second, we do know that the universe will eventually run out of something: entropy.

>7. Algorithmic simplicity. If the world arises from finite information processing, it is necessary to keep frequent calculations simple. Indeed the core mathematical laws that describe our world are surprisingly simple: “The enormous usefulness of mathematics in the natural sciences is something bordering on the mysterious and there is no rational explanation for it.” [28] In VR theory physical laws are simple because they must actually be calculated.
If the laws were complicated, one could argue that they must fulfill some kind of purpose. One way or another it's always possible to arrive to this conclusion.

>8. Choice creation. Information arises from a choice between options [29]. A mechanical or predictable choice is not really a choice in this sense. Einstein never accepted that quantum events were truly random, i.e. no prior world events could predict them. That a radioactive atom decays by pure chance, whenever “it decides” was to him unacceptable, as it was a physical event not predicted by another physical event. He argued that one day quantum random effects would be predicted by as yet unknown “hidden properties”. Yet if the source of quantum randomness is the VR processor, which is outside the physical world, this predicts that no hidden variables will ever be found.
This doesn't really say anything about whether or not the universe is simulated, though.

>In a similar way virtual reality “screens” are typically only calculated when they are viewed, i.e. when an interaction occurs [12]. If complementary object properties use the same memory location, the object can appear as having either position or momentum, but not both at once.
I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. I have never seen any simulation that stored an object's position and velocity in the same location.
Plus, Heisenberg's uncertainty principle could simply be construed as reflecting our lack of understanding about the world, not necessarily what drives the world.

>10. Digital equivalence. Every digital symbol calculated by the same program is identical to every other, e.g. every “a” on this page identical to every other one because all arise from the same computer code. In computing terms, objects can be “instances” of a general class. Likewise every photon in the universe is exactly identical to every other photon, as is every electron, quark, etc. While the objects we see have individual properties, quantum objects like photons seem all pressed from identical moulds. VR theory suggests that this is so because each is created by the same digital calculation.
Unbelievable.