It says the 70B figure "was based on _information shared with investors_ in an attempt to create a more direct comparison to rival Anthropic".
That's a different thing from what you said, that the 70B "was based on a comparison to Anthropic". It wasn't, or we can't say that using the source material. The 70B was based on an anonymous source, which used the different metric (including cloud revenue etc) supposedly to make a comparison with anthropic, which does those things, easier.
Anyway, it doesn't seem like this is "not news"
> That's a different thing from what you said
Huh? Sorry, I don't see the confusion.
> Anyway, it doesn't seem like this is "not news".
Given that the number in the headline is based off of a nonsensical apples-to-oranges comparison of revenue figures, I think at a minimum we've got a misleading headline, don't you think?