I’ll spell it for you so that you won’t have to read the book. I think the book is mixing up three different but related ideas and referring to them as simulation theory regarding “The Matrix”:

1) Solipsism represented by the idea of the brain in the jar. The only thing which exists is yourself. Other people and world around you don't exist and hence your interactions are meaningless with no moral consequences;

2) What I'll refer to as shared solipsism represented by something like the Matrix where most of the people are actually real (though there may be some who are simulated characters you can't generally distinguish them from real people without breaking out of the simulation). The world that these people inhabit though is a simulation. Actions in that simulated world may effect other people at least mentally hence actions taken in that world have moral consequences;

3) True simulation theory. All the people and the world that they inhabit is simulated. This includes yourself who would be something like a piece of software code with a limited self-awareness running on some hardware in a "real world" somewhere. (Which of course could itself be a simulation running on some higher level hardware in a higher level world ad infinitum). From the higher/real worlds perspective the interactions of the characters in the simulated world have no more moral meaning than characters in a computer game shooting each other. However since your code within the game is self-aware it makes sense to assume the same is true of other characters in the simulation and hence your actions in the simulation as far as you are able to control them have moral consequences from your point of view.

The subject is interesting though. It could have properly examined Philip K. Dick’s theories and how they stack up against questions of fundamental reality across the world’s religions and philosophies. ( )

The same few ideas are analysed over and over and over again from similar angles. The feminist parody one was at least entertaining (the matrix is a patriarchy!). Other than that it's all waffle. ( )

At least a philosophy book which is human-readable and fun ! This is the purpose of this collection : to bring philosophy to people outside of the academic milieu. I think this is achieved : I read it. And while reading it, it gave me planty of reference that my studies in "education nationale" failed to bring to me.
I a eager to grab another one of this series. ( )

This book opened the door for me to Buddhism. ( )

I did not really expect a lot, and I was not disappointed. There are a couple of good essays in here that provide some useful background material on philosophical references in the movie. For example, I had not realized that "know thyself" was written over the entrance to the abode of the oracle at Delphi. (I should probably be embarrassed to admit that.) But the majority of the essays reinforce my suspicion that philosophy has lost its purpose. It seems that most everything of value in philosophy has been taken over by math or science, whether it be cosmology, logic, or artificial intelligence.

The philosophers in this volume are right, at least, to pick out consciousness as a key presumptive difference between mechanical minds and human experience, but unfortunately none of them shed much light on the matter.