The apparent paradox is that the choice of blue/green vs grue/bleen appears symmetric: green="grue if before 2028 else bleen" whereas grue="green before 2028 el

The apparent paradox is that the choice of blue/green vs grue/bleen appears symmetric: green="grue if before 2028 else bleen" whereas grue="green before 2028 else blue". But then why do we strongly prefer to make predictions using green/blue instead of grue/bleen? One way to resolve this paradox is to translate the terms into the raw language of physics, at which point it's obvious which one is simpler. More concretely, imagine trying to make a camera that recognizes "bleen" vs making a camera that recognizes "blue". Which camera only works if you include a clock? More abstractly, I would say that the Solomonoff complexity (aka algorithmic complexity) of bleen is higher than blue (for basically any programming language or hardware you will run into). Therefore you prefer blue/green. Yes, one can generalize the paradox by reformulating all of physics or all of computer architecture to be based on the before/after 2028 distinction. And yet, it does seem that that would make the physics harder and the hardware more expensive, right? There seems to be an objective sense in which nature is built around blue/green rather than grue/bleen.