OMNI AI Film Festival, a new film competition showcasing only AI generated films, will have its inaugural festival in Sydney this November.
Following this announcement, ScreenHub spoke to OMNI founders Aryeh Sternberg and Travis Rice for a Q and A about the ethics of AI filmmaking, and why George Miller decided to join the judging panel.
Answers have been edited for clarity.
OMNI AI Film Festival responds: quick links
Why do you think the world needs a film festival dedicated exclusively to AI-generated films right now?
Travis Rice: Film and cinema have existed for a very long time and will continue to; drawing a line around showcasing only AI-generated films means we can see these works on their own merit. We are exploring this by highlighting the very top edge of the deep and wide (and sometimes dark) pool of generative content that is actively being shared widely on the internet. We are focused on showcasing and sharing only quality stories, and they do exist.
Our film program is intentionally only presented in person, bringing people together to have a shared experience and dialogue. The concept of holding up a mirror to these advances in generative AI is core to our direction and for audiences to reflect on the value of their own attention.
At OMNI, we are not saying AI is the best way; we are saying AI is ONE WAY.
We are exploring this by highlighting the very top edge of the deep and wide (and sometimes dark) pool of generative content
OMNI AI Film Festival co-founders Aryeh Sternberg and Travis Rice. Image supplied.
Do you see OMNI as pushing towards a future where AI films compete directly with human-made films in mainstream festivals? How does that future make you feel?
Aryeh Sternberg: The OMNI AI Film Festival was created to fill a distinct gap in the global festival landscape. While a few festivals have begun to accept AI-assisted films, none were dedicated exclusively to generative AI filmmaking. We launched OMNI with a clear focus and a clear boundary: submissions must be composed of at least 90% generative AI, whether in scripting, image generation, video, sound design, music, voice, or any other component of the production process.
During OMNI 0.5, we received a range of submissions, including some entirely traditional, beautifully filmed analog movies that used no AI whatsoever. While we appreciated the artistry, we had to respectfully decline those entries. They simply didn’t align with the core purpose of OMNI: to explore and showcase what’s possible through generative tools.
Today, many festivals are beginning to offer ‘AI categories,’ but often without fully defining what that entails. This creates confusion among entrants and audiences alike. At OMNI, we are crystal clear in our criteria and proud to champion a new category of cinematic creation.
We’re adding AI as an option and building a platform for filmmakers who are pioneering entirely new workflows. And while the tools are different, the standard remains the same: high-quality, emotionally resonant storytelling.
Submissions must be composed of at least 90% generative AI, whether in scripting, image generation, video, sound design, music, voice, or any other component of the production process.
You’ve framed AI as ‘the next frontier of storytelling’. What do you say to filmmakers who view it as a shortcut or a compromise rather than an evolution?
Sternberg: The challenge with how traditional filmmakers talk about AI filmmaking is the assumption that it’s a shortcut. But there are no shortcuts when it comes to producing high-quality stories with generative film; it’s simply a different workflow. It still requires a deep understanding of the craft of filmmaking and storytelling, plus additional skills and expertise that don’t exist in traditional production.
Creating effective prompts and guiding an AI engine demands comprehensive knowledge of everything that goes into building a cinematic moment. You’re not just generating visuals; you’re directing, designing, and editing in fragmented, one-to-5-second increments. Unlike shooting with a camera, where continuity and control are built into the process, generative filmmaking requires you to construct cohesion manually and deliberately.
Storytelling becomes even more critical in this space. You have to imagine and shape the emotional arc frame by frame, without the fluidity of live action. So while the tools may be different, the creativity and the labor involved are intensive. It’s not about cutting corners.
Creating effective prompts and guiding an AI engine demands comprehensive knowledge of everything that goes into building a cinematic moment.
You say all entries are tested for plagiarism. How, specifically, do you check that an AI model hasn’t trained on copyrighted works?
Sternberg: This is an important question as detecting plagiarism in generative film is a complex task. What exactly constitutes plagiarism in this context? Are we talking about visual content, source material, narrative structure, characters, names, or locations? And where do we draw the line between inspiration, homage, parody, and outright infringement? It’s a moving dynamic.
For our OMNI Festival, filmmakers assert their creative rights and ownership when submitting the film, granting OMNI exhibition rights for a small number of live screenings. We also ask that the filmmaker explicitly state the tools used to create these works, tools such as Runway, Kling or Moon Valley. Broadly, we avoid content that showcases the explicit use of copyrighted or unoriginal materials, such as directly copying people’s likenesses, recognisable locations, or film footage, or using cut-and-paste elements from existing media. This type of content is not compelling and only represents a tiny fraction of our entries and none of our award winners.
Current copyright laws on AI content, both nationally and internationally, are still evolving and often leave a great deal of ambiguity around generative content. We are watching this space carefully and hope to provide a lens for social understanding, education and further dialogue.
OMNI AI Film Festival’s preview event. Image supplied.
Do you think a festival can legitimately police ethical use of AI when even government regulators are struggling to do so?
Sternberg: In our view it’s an ongoing challenge. The role of a film festival is to promote quality film in an aware and responsible manner. Our responsibility is to evaluate the creative and technical quality of the films submitted based on the criteria we’ve clearly set out in our admission guidelines. We’re not a regulatory body or a legal authority. We’re a platform for showcasing the best creativity in a rapidly evolving medium: generative cinema.
That said, we take the legal landscape seriously. We remain in close contact with organisations like the Copyright Agency and follow developments in copyright law and content regulation. Where the lines are clearly drawn, such as in cases of copyright infringement, we act accordingly.
How do you judge ‘authorship’ in a film created with prompts and datasets rather than cameras and crews?
Sternberg: We’ve seen this kind of shift before: from typewriters to word processors, from static grammar rules to adaptive suggestions powered by tools like Grammarly. Each leap forward introduced new capabilities, but none removed the need for a human voice, a clear purpose, or a creative decision-maker.
The same applies to generative filmmaking. Yes, it’s a new workflow, but it’s still filmmaking.
Every OMNI submission must include a breakdown of the platforms and tools used, not just to verify that generative methods were involved, but to contribute to the collective knowledge of the community. We want creators to learn from each other, challenge each other, and ultimately raise the bar for what this new medium can achieve.
Why did you approach George Miller to join the judging panel, and what do you think his involvement signals to the industry?
Rice: Earlier this year, Yan Chen, one of the judges from OMNI 0.5, showed George some of the films that were submitted for the first test screening. From my understanding, it sounds as if he was very surprised by the quality and consistency. He expressed real interest in how far generative filmmaking had come and in joining the festival dialogue, and may be exploring this as a serious new tool in visual storytelling.
In five years, what does success look like for OMNI?
Rice: Over the next five years, we know the filmmaking landscape will continue to shift. OMNI’s role is to provide a platform that highlights quality in this field, where that evolution and its social value can be seen and discussed by audiences, creators, industry leaders, and skeptics alike.
The real, human and emotional element of storytelling is crucial to film and will be for a very long time.
ProRataAI, a company committed to building AI solutions that honor and reward the work of content creators, has announced the close of a $40 million Series B funding round. The round was led by Touring Capital, with participation from a growing network of investors who share ProRata’s vision for a more equitable and transparent AI ecosystem. This latest investment brings the company’s total funding to over $75 million since its founding just last year, and it marks a significant step forward in its mission to reshape how publishers engage with generative AI.
The company also announced the launch of Gist Answers, ProRata’s new AI-as-a-service platform designed to give publishers direct control over how AI interacts with their content. Gist Answers allows media organizations to embed custom AI search, summarization, and recommendation tools directly into their websites and digital properties. Rather than watching their content be scraped and repurposed without consent, publishers can now offer AI-powered experiences on their own terms—driving deeper engagement, longer user sessions, and more meaningful interactions with their audiences.
The platform has already attracted early-access partners representing over 100 publications, a testament to the growing demand for AI tools that respect editorial integrity and support sustainable business models. Gist Answers is designed to be flexible and intuitive, allowing publishers to tailor the AI experience to their brand’s voice and editorial standards. It’s not just about delivering answers—it’s about creating a richer, more interactive layer of discovery that keeps users engaged and informed.
Beyond direct integration, ProRata is also offering publishers the opportunity to license their content to inform Gist Answers across third-party destinations. More than 700 high-quality publications around the world have already joined this initiative, contributing to a growing network of licensed content that powers AI responses with verified, attributable information. This model is underpinned by ProRata’s proprietary content attribution technology, which ensures that every piece of content used by the AI is properly credited and compensated. In doing so, the company is building a framework where human creativity is not only preserved but actively rewarded in the AI economy.
Gist Answers is designed to work seamlessly with Gist Ads, ProRata’s innovative advertising platform that transforms AI-generated responses into premium ad inventory. By placing native, conversational ads adjacent to AI answers, Gist Ads creates a format that aligns with user intent and delivers strong performance for marketers. For publishers, this means new revenue streams that are directly tied to the value of their content and the engagement it drives.
ProRata’s approach stands in stark contrast to the extractive models that have dominated the early days of generative AI. The company was founded on the belief that the work of journalists, creators, and publishers is not just data to be mined—it’s a vital source of knowledge and insight that deserves recognition, protection, and compensation. By building systems that prioritize licensing over scraping, transparency over opacity, and partnership over exploitation, ProRata is proving that AI can be both powerful and principled.
How the funding will be used: With the Series B funding, ProRata plans to scale its team, expand its product offerings, and deepen its relationships with publishers and content creators around the world. The company is focused on building tools that are not only technologically advanced but also aligned with the values of the people who produce the content that fuels AI. As generative AI continues to evolve, ProRata is positioning itself as a trusted partner for publishers seeking to navigate this new landscape with confidence and integrity.
KEY QUOTES:
“Search has always shaped how people discover knowledge, but for too long publishers have been forced to give that power away. Gist Answers changes that dynamic, bringing AI search directly to their sites, where it deepens engagement, restores control, and opens entirely new paths for discovery.”
Bill Gross, CEO and founder of ProRata
“Generative AI is reshaping search and digital advertising, creating an opportunity for a new category of infrastructure to compensate content creators whose work powers the answers we are relying on daily. ProRata is addressing this inflection point with a market-neutral model designed to become the default platform for attribution and fair monetization across the ecosystem. We believe the shift toward AI-native search experiences will unlock greater value for advertisers, publishers, and consumers alike.”
Nagraj Kashyap, General Partner, Touring Capital
“As a publisher, our priority is making sure our journalism reaches audiences in trusted ways. By contributing our content to the Gist network, we know it’s being used ethically, with full credit, while also helping adopters of Gist Answers deliver accurate, high-quality responses to their readers.”
Nicholas Thompson, CEO of The Atlantic
“The role of publishers in the AI era is to ensure that trusted journalism remains central to how people search and learn. By partnering with ProRata, we’re showing how an established brand can embrace new technology like Gist Answers to deepen engagement and demonstrate the enduring value of quality journalism.”
Andrew Perlman, CEO of Recurrent, owner of Popular Science
“Search has always been critical to how our readers find and interact with content. With Gist Answers, our audience can engage directly with us and get trusted answers sourced from our reporting, strengthened by content from a vetted network of international media outlets. Engagement is higher, and we’re able to explore new revenue opportunities that simply didn’t exist before.”
Jeremy Gulban, CEO of CherryRoad Media
“We’re really excited to be partnering with ProRata. At Arena, we’re always looking for unique and innovative ways to better serve our audience, and Gist Answers allows us to adapt to new technology in an ethical way.”
Paul Edmondson, CEO of The Arena Group, owner of Parade and Athlon Sports
Image: https://www.globalnewslines.com/uploads/2025/09/06b23a7a1cd3a9eec5188c16c0896a60.jpg
Photo Courtesy: Michael Lissack
“Understanding is not a destination we reach, but a spiral we climb-each new question changes the view, and each new view reveals questions we couldn’t see before.”
Michael Lissack, Executive Director of the Second Order Science Foundation, cybernetics expert, and professor at Tongji University, has released his new book, “Questioning Understanding [https://www.amazon.com/Questioning-Understanding-Michael-Lissack/dp/B0FC1S1LYL].” Now available, the book explores a fresh perspective on scientific inquiry by encouraging readers to reconsider the assumptions that shape how we understand the world.
A Thought-Provoking Approach to Scientific Inquiry
In “Questioning Understanding,” Lissack introduces the concept of second-order science, a framework that examines the uncritically examined presuppositions (UCEPs) that often underlie scientific practices. These assumptions, while sometimes essential for scientific work, may also constrain our ability to explore complex phenomena fully. Lissack suggests that by engaging with these assumptions critically, there could be potential for a deeper understanding of the scientific process and its role in advancing human knowledge.
The book features an innovative tete-beche format, offering two entry points for readers: “Questioning right Understanding” or “Understanding right Questioning.” This structure reflects the dynamic relationship between knowledge and inquiry, aiming to highlight how questioning and understanding are interconnected and reciprocal. By offering two different entry paths, Lissack emphasizes that the journey of scientific inquiry is not linear. Instead, it’s a continuous process of revisiting previous assumptions and refining the lens through which we view the world.
The Battle Against Sloppy Science
Lissack’s work took on new urgency during the COVID-19 pandemic, when he witnessed an explosion of what he calls “slodderwetenschap”-Dutch for “sloppy science”-characterized by shortcuts, oversimplifications, and the proliferation of “truthies” (assertions that feel true regardless of their validity).
Working with colleague Brenden Meagher, Lissack identified how sloppy science undermines public trust through what he calls the “3Ts”-Truthies, TL;DR (oversimplification), and TCUSI (taking complex understanding for simple information). Their research revealed how “truthies spread rampantly during the pandemic, damaging public health communication” through “biased attention, confirmation bias, and confusion between surface information and deeper meanings”.
“COVID-19 demonstrated that good science seldom comes from taking shortcuts or relying on ‘truthies,'” Lissack notes.
“Good science, instead, demands that we continually ask what about a given factoid, label, category, or narrative affords its meaning-and then to base further inquiry on the assumptions, contexts, and constraints so revealed.”
AI as the New Frontier of Questioning
As AI technologies, including Large Language Models (LLMs), continue to influence research and scientific methods, Lissack’s work has become increasingly relevant. In his book “Questioning Understanding”, Lissack presents a thoughtful examination of AI in scientific research, urging a responsible approach to its use. He discusses how AI tools may support scientific progress but also notes that their potential limitations can undermine the rigor of research if used uncritically.
“AI tools have the capacity to both support and challenge the quality of scientific inquiry, depending on how they are employed,” says Lissack.
“It is essential that we engage with AI systems as partners in discovery-through reflective dialogue-rather than relying on them as simple solutions to complex problems.”
He stresses that while AI can significantly accelerate research, it is still important for human researchers to remain critically engaged with the data and models produced, questioning the assumptions encoded within AI systems.
With over 2,130 citations on Google Scholar, Lissack’s work continues to shape discussions on how knowledge is created and applied in modern research. His innovative ideas have influenced numerous fields, from cybernetics to the integration of AI in scientific inquiry.
Recognition and Global Impact
Lissack’s contributions to the academic world have earned him significant recognition. He was named among “Wall Street’s 25 Smartest Players” by Worth Magazine and included in the “100 Americans Who Most Influenced How We Think About Money.” His efforts extend beyond personal recognition; he advocates for a research landscape that emphasizes integrity, critical thinking, and ethical foresight in the application of emerging technologies, ensuring that these tools foster scientific progress without compromising standards.
About “Questioning Understanding”
“Questioning Understanding” provides an in-depth exploration of the assumptions that guide scientific inquiry, urging readers to challenge their perspectives. Designed as a tete-beche edition-two books in one with dual covers and no single entry point-it forces readers to choose where to begin: “Questioning right Understanding” or “Understanding right Questioning.” This innovative format reflects the recursive relationship between inquiry and insight at the heart of his work.
As Michael explains: “Understanding is fluid… if understanding is a river, questions shape the canyon the river flows in.” The book demonstrates how our assumptions about knowledge creation itself shape what we can discover, making the case for what he calls “reflexive scientific practice”-science that consciously examines its own presuppositions.
Image: https://www.globalnewslines.com/uploads/2025/09/a01d49d4c742e01bea6bfeb0a16f3132.jpg Photo Courtesy: Michael Lissack
About Michael Lissack
Michael Lissack is a globally recognized figure in second-order science, cybernetics, and AI ethics. He is the Executive Director of the Second Order Science Foundation and a Professor of Design and Innovation at Tongji University in Shanghai. Lissack has served as President of the American Society for Cybernetics and is widely acknowledged for his contributions to the field of complexity science and the promotion of rigorous, ethical research practices.
Building on foundational work in cybernetics and complexity science, Lissack developed the framework of UnCritically Examined Presuppositions (UCEPs)-nine key dimensions, including context dependence, quantitative indexicality, and fundierung dependence, that act as “enabling constraints” in scientific inquiry. These hidden assumptions simultaneously make scientific work possible while limiting what can be observed or understood.
As Lissack explains: “Second order science examines variations in values assumed for these UCEPs and looks at the resulting impacts on related scientific claims. Second order science reveals hidden issues, problems, and assumptions which all too often escape the attention of the practicing scientist.”
Michael Lissack’s books are available through major retailers. Learn more about his work at lissack.com [https://www.lissack.com/] and the Second Order Science Foundation at secondorderscience.org [https://www.secondorderscience.org/]. Media Contact Company Name: Digital Networking Agency Email: Send Email [http://www.universalpressrelease.com/?pr=michael-lissacks-new-book-questioning-understanding-explores-the-future-of-scientific-inquiry-and-ai-ethics] Phone: +1 571 233 9913 Country: United States Website: https://www.digitalnetworkingagency.com/
Legal Disclaimer: Information contained on this page is provided by an independent third-party content provider. GetNews makes no warranties or responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you are affiliated with this article or have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article and would like it to be removed, please contact retract@swscontact.com
“Understanding is not a destination we reach, but a spiral we climb—each new question changes the view, and each new view reveals questions we couldn’t see before.”
Michael Lissack, Executive Director of the Second Order Science Foundation, cybernetics expert, and professor at Tongji University, has released his new book, “Questioning Understanding.” Now available, the book explores a fresh perspective on scientific inquiry by encouraging readers to reconsider the assumptions that shape how we understand the world.
A Thought-Provoking Approach to Scientific Inquiry
In “Questioning Understanding,” Lissack introduces the concept of second-order science, a framework that examines the uncritically examined presuppositions (UCEPs) that often underlie scientific practices. These assumptions, while sometimes essential for scientific work, may also constrain our ability to explore complex phenomena fully. Lissack suggests that by engaging with these assumptions critically, there could be potential for a deeper understanding of the scientific process and its role in advancing human knowledge.
The book features an innovative tête-bêche format, offering two entry points for readers: “Questioning → Understanding” or “Understanding → Questioning.” This structure reflects the dynamic relationship between knowledge and inquiry, aiming to highlight how questioning and understanding are interconnected and reciprocal. By offering two different entry paths, Lissack emphasizes that the journey of scientific inquiry is not linear. Instead, it’s a continuous process of revisiting previous assumptions and refining the lens through which we view the world.
The Battle Against Sloppy Science
Lissack’s work took on new urgency during the COVID-19 pandemic, when he witnessed an explosion of what he calls “slodderwetenschap”—Dutch for “sloppy science”—characterized by shortcuts, oversimplifications, and the proliferation of “truthies” (assertions that feel true regardless of their validity).
Working with colleague Brenden Meagher, Lissack identified how sloppy science undermines public trust through what he calls the “3Ts”—Truthies, TL;DR (oversimplification), and TCUSI (taking complex understanding for simple information). Their research revealed how “truthies spread rampantly during the pandemic, damaging public health communication” through “biased attention, confirmation bias, and confusion between surface information and deeper meanings”.
“COVID-19 demonstrated that good science seldom comes from taking shortcuts or relying on ‘truthies,'” Lissack notes.
“Good science, instead, demands that we continually ask what about a given factoid, label, category, or narrative affords its meaning—and then to base further inquiry on the assumptions, contexts, and constraints so revealed.”
AI as the New Frontier of Questioning
As AI technologies, including Large Language Models (LLMs), continue to influence research and scientific methods, Lissack’s work has become increasingly relevant. In his book “Questioning Understanding”, Lissack presents a thoughtful examination of AI in scientific research, urging a responsible approach to its use. He discusses how AI tools may support scientific progress but also notes that their potential limitations can undermine the rigor of research if used uncritically.
“AI tools have the capacity to both support and challenge the quality of scientific inquiry, depending on how they are employed,” says Lissack.
“It is essential that we engage with AI systems as partners in discovery—through reflective dialogue—rather than relying on them as simple solutions to complex problems.”
He stresses that while AI can significantly accelerate research, it is still important for human researchers to remain critically engaged with the data and models produced, questioning the assumptions encoded within AI systems.
With over 2,130 citations on Google Scholar, Lissack’s work continues to shape discussions on how knowledge is created and applied in modern research. His innovative ideas have influenced numerous fields, from cybernetics to the integration of AI in scientific inquiry.
Recognition and Global Impact
Lissack’s contributions to the academic world have earned him significant recognition. He was named among “Wall Street’s 25 Smartest Players” by Worth Magazine and included in the “100 Americans Who Most Influenced How We Think About Money.” His efforts extend beyond personal recognition; he advocates for a research landscape that emphasizes integrity, critical thinking, and ethical foresight in the application of emerging technologies, ensuring that these tools foster scientific progress without compromising standards.
About “Questioning Understanding”
“Questioning Understanding” provides an in-depth exploration of the assumptions that guide scientific inquiry, urging readers to challenge their perspectives. Designed as a tête-bêche edition—two books in one with dual covers and no single entry point—it forces readers to choose where to begin: “Questioning → Understanding” or “Understanding → Questioning.” This innovative format reflects the recursive relationship between inquiry and insight at the heart of his work.
As Michael explains: “Understanding is fluid… if understanding is a river, questions shape the canyon the river flows in.” The book demonstrates how our assumptions about knowledge creation itself shape what we can discover, making the case for what he calls “reflexive scientific practice”—science that consciously examines its own presuppositions.
Photo Courtesy: Michael Lissack
About Michael Lissack
Michael Lissack is a globally recognized figure in second-order science, cybernetics, and AI ethics. He is the Executive Director of the Second Order Science Foundation and a Professor of Design and Innovation at Tongji University in Shanghai. Lissack has served as President of the American Society for Cybernetics and is widely acknowledged for his contributions to the field of complexity science and the promotion of rigorous, ethical research practices.
Building on foundational work in cybernetics and complexity science, Lissack developed the framework of UnCritically Examined Presuppositions (UCEPs)—nine key dimensions, including context dependence, quantitative indexicality, and fundierung dependence, that act as “enabling constraints” in scientific inquiry. These hidden assumptions simultaneously make scientific work possible while limiting what can be observed or understood.
As Lissack explains: “Second order science examines variations in values assumed for these UCEPs and looks at the resulting impacts on related scientific claims. Second order science reveals hidden issues, problems, and assumptions which all too often escape the attention of the practicing scientist.”
Michael Lissack’s books are available through major retailers. Learn more about his work at lissack.com and the Second Order Science Foundation at secondorderscience.org.
Business1 week ago
Ethics & Policy1 month ago
Events & Conferences4 months ago
Jobs & Careers2 months ago
Education2 months ago
Podcasts & Talks2 months ago
Funding & Business2 months ago
Education2 months ago
Podcasts & Talks2 months ago