No, he was asked a leading question by someone about us being in a simulation, and answered it using the standard philosophical argument people use for the simulation argument. And then he clarified that he and his brother are no longer allowed to discuss these things in hot tubs anymore.
Everyone, I assume, has entertained these ideas and thought about them. He didn't bring it up, he wasn't out to make some real point. You can use similar arguments to argue that we are at, or close to, one of the last human generations, or that the traffic in the other lane really does go faster.
They are all examples of the observation selection effect, wherein you make the assumption that you as the observer are a randomly chosen sample in the population space. In my mind, that right there is the trouble with all the arguments using that principle. You start out with an assumption of the distribution of a random sample, then you _force_ that random sample to be you, and then make conclusions based on the (no longer) random sample. Any conclusions made after the force are not valid. Just like in magic, if every time the magician shows you a "random" card from a deck, it's the 3 of clubs, then obviously the whole deck contains only 3 of clubs, right?