In the interview with Meade and Murphy, Professor Goodman mentions that it is difficult for the public to understand how prediction systems work. Meade mentions how difficult it is to convince the public of the severity of natural disasters, citing the misunderstanding of the uncertainty with climate change. On the other hand, Murphy mentions that it is easier to convince individual people of predictions regarding their health. I would like to ask, do they believe that the public will only spend the time understanding predictive systems when they have a more personal stake in the prediction, or is it because of bystander effect, or maybe both? Is part of their job finding the best way to relay their predictions to the public in a way that is most understanding and creates action, even if it is not the most technically descriptive and accurate?