Yes, it is rather tiring having to read the same old objections once and again as if they were new objections and complete refutations.
These objections have already been answered by Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) and it’s likely that they have been answered by even more ancient authors. The impossibility of an infinite regress possibility («simulations all the way down») has also been discussed extensively.
But, no matter that thousands of pages have been devoted to these topics for centuries, there is always somebody who thinks he is very clever saying: «So who caused God? Checkmate!» No matter that you explain the same things thousands of times. The objection resurfaces every day and it is always stated as if it was something new and as if it was something definitive.
I think Richard Dawkins is an example of this anti-intellectual attitude when it comes to metaphysics. The guy, who is a biologist, tries (and achieves) to be the leading figure of atheism worldwide without reading anything that came before him. His book is full of nonsense and embarrasses professional atheist philosophers.
It is like I want to be the leading figure of biology, without reading any previous biology book. Then, I figure out a definitive objection against evolution: «Man cannot come from apes, because the child of an ape is another ape. Checkmate!» No matter how many times this objection is answered, it always appear as new. As I said, it’s tiring.