James Carter Senior News Editor

PROVIDENCE, R.I. – The UMass Minutemen secured an 11-8 victory over the Brown Bears in men’s lacrosse action on Wednesday, February 25, 2026, at Stevenson-Pincince Field. The win marked the fourth consecutive victory for UMass, while handing Brown their first loss of the season. A dominant performance by UMass goalie Owen Salanger proved crucial in the outcome of this Ivy League contest.

The game was a back-and-forth affair early on, with both teams trading goals. Brown initially surged ahead with three consecutive goals from Jeremy Hopsicker, Marcus Wertheim, and Jackson Wolfram, establishing a 4-1 lead in the first quarter. However, UMass responded with a strong push, ultimately taking a 5-4 lead into halftime. The Minutemen’s resilience and Salanger’s exceptional goalkeeping were key factors in shifting the momentum.

Owen Salanger, the redshirt sophomore goalkeeper for UMass, delivered a career-defining performance, recording a remarkable 23 saves. UMass Athletics reports this surpassed his previous career high of 16 saves achieved in last year’s matchup against Brown. Salanger’s ability to deny Brown scoring opportunities, holding them scoreless for a significant 38-minute stretch, proved pivotal.

Offensively, Dylan Johnson led the UMass attack with four goals, bringing his season total to nine. Charles Kurtz also contributed a hat trick, also reaching nine goals on the season. Robbie Granara added two goals, while Colin Coyle and Jack Turowsky each scored once for the Minutemen. For Brown, Jeremy Hopsicker completed a hat trick, and Brady O’Kane scored twice.

The second half saw UMass extend their lead, with Charles Kurtz scoring consecutive goals to push the advantage to 9-5. Brown attempted to rally, with Preston Evans scoring his first career goal, but the Minutemen maintained control. The final minutes saw both teams add to their tallies, concluding with a final score of 11-8 in favor of UMass.

UMass coach Jon Torpey acknowledged the challenge posed by Brown, stating, “Hats off to UMass, they played a great game,” according to Brown Bears Athletics. “They executed, their goalie stood on his head, and they took advantage of our mistakes.”

Connor Foley recorded 16 saves for the Bears, but it wasn’t enough to overcome Salanger’s performance and UMass’s offensive output.

Here’s a quick gaze at the scoring breakdown:

The Minutemen will now look ahead to their next challenge, while Brown will aim to rebound from their first defeat of the season. The UMass team currently holds a record of 4-1, while Brown falls to 2-1.

The next game for Brown is scheduled for Saturday against Bryant, and coach Torpey expressed confidence in his team’s ability to respond. The Ivy League season is still young, and both teams have opportunities to improve and contend for a championship.

What impact will Owen Salanger’s performance have on the Minutemen’s confidence moving forward? Share your thoughts in the comments below, and be sure to share this article with fellow lacrosse fans.

New Delhi – OpenAI CEO Sam Altman sparked controversy last week with remarks suggesting a troubling equivalence between human life and artificial intelligence. Speaking at the India AI Impact Summit, Altman defended AI’s resource consumption by arguing that “training a human” requires comparable energy expenditure – a statement that has drawn criticism for its implications about the value of human existence in an age of rapidly advancing technology.

Altman’s comments came in response to a question from The Indian Express regarding the environmental impact of generative AI models. Rather than address the concerns directly, he pivoted to a comparison of the resources needed to develop a person – “20 years of life and all the food you eat” – with the energy required to run a chatbot. This framing, critics argue, reveals a concerning mindset within the AI industry, one that increasingly views machines as comparable to, or even surpassing, human beings.

“The fair comparison is, if you ask ChatGPT a question, how much energy does it take once its model is trained to answer that question, versus a human?” Altman posited, suggesting AI may already be more energy-efficient. However, experts point out that this comparison overlooks the significant energy consumption of the devices people leverage to interact with AI, as well as the broader environmental costs associated with data centers and AI development. Atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are currently at levels not seen in millions of years, driven by contemporary human activity, not the evolutionary history of life on Earth.

The debate extends beyond energy consumption. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, Altman’s chief rival, echoed similar sentiments at the same summit, likening the training of AI models to human evolution. This mindset is influencing product development, with Anthropic even studying whether its chatbot, Claude, experiences “distress” and allowing it to terminate conversations deemed “harmful” – a clear example of anthropomorphizing a non-sentient program.

The Rise of AI Personhood?

This trend towards equating AI with human life isn’t accidental. It’s a carefully cultivated narrative, some argue, driven by financial incentives. OpenAI is reportedly seeking funding that would value the company at over $800 billion, nearly matching the market capitalization of Walmart, according to multiple reports. Presenting AI as a form of “digital life” can bolster investment and public perception.

However, the implications are far-reaching. A genuine belief that AI is approaching or achieving sentience could justify prioritizing its development over the well-being of humanity and the planet. Altman himself has stated he believes superintelligence is “just a few years away,” a claim that raises concerns about the potential for unchecked technological advancement.

The comparison between human development and AI training also reveals a fundamental disconnect from what it means to be human. Although AI strives for instant efficiency, human life is characterized by struggle, failure and the pursuit of wonder – qualities that are deliberately absent from algorithmic design. Generative AI aims to eliminate these processes, offering effortless solutions, but at what cost?

Data Center Emissions and the Energy Debate

The environmental impact of AI extends beyond the energy used to power individual queries. Data centers, the backbone of AI infrastructure, are increasingly reliant on private, gas-fired power plants. These facilities, along with the extension of existing coal plants, could collectively generate enough electricity to power dozens of major American cities while producing substantial greenhouse gas emissions. OpenAI, which has a corporate partnership with Forbes, did not respond to requests for comment regarding Altman’s remarks or the company’s energy consumption practices.

Altman acknowledged the energy problem, suggesting a rapid transition to nuclear, wind, and solar power as a solution. However, critics argue that the AI industry should prioritize responsible development and energy efficiency before demanding massive infrastructure changes.

What’s Next for AI and Humanity?

The rhetoric surrounding AI is shifting, and the implications are profound. As AI models become more sophisticated, the line between machine and human is becoming increasingly blurred, at least in the minds of some industry leaders. This blurring carries risks, potentially leading to a devaluation of human life and a prioritization of technological advancement over ethical considerations.

The coming months will be crucial as OpenAI and Anthropic continue to push the boundaries of AI development. The industry’s trajectory will depend on whether it embraces a human-centered approach or continues down a path that prioritizes efficiency and innovation at the expense of our shared future. The debate over AI’s role in society is only just beginning, and it’s a conversation that demands careful consideration and broad participation.

What are your thoughts on the ethical implications of AI development? Share your perspective in the comments below.

WASHINGTON – The Trump administration announced Wednesday We see temporarily suspending nearly $260 million in Medicaid funding to Minnesota, citing concerns over alleged fraud within the state’s program. The move, framed as part of a broader “war on fraud” by Vice President J.D. Vance, raises questions about access to healthcare for vulnerable populations in the state.

Speaking alongside Dr. Mehmet Oz, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), Vance stated the administration is taking this action to ensure Minnesota “takes seriously its obligations to responsibly manage federal taxpayer dollars.” The suspension targets $259.5 million in federal funding allocated to Minnesota’s Medicaid program, which provides healthcare coverage to low-income individuals and families.

Dr. Oz characterized those committing fraud as “selfish criminals” and emphasized that the issue isn’t with the people of Minnesota, but with state leadership. “This isn’t a problem with the people of Minnesota, it’s a problem with the leaders of Minnesota and other states who aren’t taking preserving Medicaid seriously,” he said. This action follows allegations of fraud involving daycare centers in Minneapolis, reportedly operated by individuals of Somali descent, which triggered increased scrutiny of immigration practices in the region and sparked widespread protests.

The decision is part of a larger initiative unveiled by President Donald Trump during his State of the Union address on Tuesday, where he announced Vance would lead a national “war on fraud.” Trump recently appointed Colin McDonald to a key position within the Department of Justice dedicated to combating fraud, signaling a heightened focus on identifying and prosecuting misuse of public funds.

Dr. Oz explained that the administration simultaneously informed Minnesota Governor Tim Walz of the funding suspension. Attempts to reach spokespeople for Walz, who was previously Kamala Harris’s running mate in the 2024 election, were not immediately successful. “We will give them the money, but we will hold onto it and only release it once they’ve proposed and implemented a comprehensive corrective action plan to address the problem,” Dr. Oz stated. He added that Walz has 60 days to respond and advised healthcare providers and Medicaid beneficiaries to contact the governor’s office with concerns.

Keith Ellison, Minnesota’s Attorney General, whose office is already investigating Medicaid fraud, referred inquiries to the state’s Department of Human Services, which administers Medicaid. A spokesperson for the department stated the agency is preparing a statement. Earlier Wednesday, Ellison held a press conference advocating for legislation that would provide his office with additional resources to combat Medicaid fraud.

The CMS is too taking steps to address potential fraud within Medicare, the federal health insurance program for seniors. Dr. Oz announced a six-month moratorium on new enrollments to Medicare for suppliers of durable medical equipment, prosthetics, orthotics, and other supplies used to treat chronic illnesses or aid in recovery from injuries.

The administration’s actions approach as scrutiny intensifies over potential vulnerabilities in both Medicaid and Medicare programs. The suspension of funds to Minnesota underscores the federal government’s commitment to combating fraud and ensuring the responsible use of taxpayer dollars, but also raises concerns about the potential impact on healthcare access for those who rely on Medicaid services. The situation will likely prompt further debate over the balance between oversight and access to essential healthcare programs.

What happens next will depend on Governor Walz’s response and the corrective action plan proposed by Minnesota officials. The next 60 days will be critical in determining whether the suspended funds are restored and whether the state can demonstrate a commitment to addressing the alleged fraud.

Share your thoughts on this developing story in the comments below.

Disclaimer: This article provides informational content and should not be considered professional financial or medical advice.