I have had thoughts about how we attach meaning to symbols in computers (our designed computational systems), and how a physical system like a landslide, or accretion disk or something could accidentally assume forms and computation-like behaviours which we could attach symbolic meaning to, yet mostly do not /can not as we are not watching.

With such a vision there is strong ambiguity in the world over what is potentially symbolically meaningful to someone, the meanings things can carry, and the stories their symbols can follow. I think that essential ambiguity of interpretation, of the apparent orders and symbols in the world, makes nonsense of the popular idea that we may ourselves be certain sophisticated symbolic constructs in an advanced simulation.

Sorry for this but I am in the middle of doing something else and have only skimmed this paper but it looks tantalisingly relevant...