Let us remember that Pascal mugging is almost never an issue for humans, who instictively ignore the possibilities they consider of low probability. I mean the subjective probability only. For example, people who are afraid of flying alieve in the high probability of a plane crash happening to them, so there is no Pascal mugging here. Same with the lottery players. Or the original Pascal's wager. No normal person will give $5 to the mugger in exchange for the promise to not create and torture a bazillion of simulated humans. Well, maybe some hapless LW reader thinking that they might be in a simulation would.

The issue only arises for an AGI, where you have to balance calculated infinitesimal odds against calculated enormous payoffs/penalties. Because only an AGi would bother calculating (and be able to calculate) them properly to begin with.

Repeat conning is not an issue if you are an AGI. Neither are the matrix lords. And precommitting to rejecting mugging is what humans already do naturally, so your suggestion has a rather low surprise value :)

An interesting issue is the one pointed out by Eliezer, where the odds are increased enormously by the provided non-anthropic evidence, but are still infinitesimally small.