Well, if you read the "every number is interesting" "proof", this clearly doesn't capture the proof's criteria of interestingness.
I see it as analogous to Berry's paradox - the proof isn't "wrong" per se, but the relevant notion of interestingness is not well defined
You can express whatever idea of "interestingness" you like in this framework by finding a predicate that expresses it.
Well, if you read the "every number is interesting" "proof", this clearly doesn't capture the proof's criteria of interestingness.
I see it as analogous to Berry's paradox - the proof isn't "wrong" per se, but the relevant notion of interestingness is not well defined