> OK, explain, what to the "just use Claude code" means in your opinion.
I see you didn't get the message. It's not about opinions. Don't add a bunch of extra meanings to suit your argument.
The original comment was:
> just use claude code to use rclone on a server and let it run automatically, its great and easy
First, it says "use claude code to use rclone." It's very simple English, yet it directly contradicts your claim that "you're not even using Claude code to run rclone for you."
> Because that's the only way I'd understand someone to go on such rant.
Yeah, no wonder given the above.
Going back to the original comment, it says it's easy. Easier than not using Claude Code, which is typing `rclone copy <source> .`. Every justification that you pulled out of thin air is more complicated than that.
> Is this what you'd do?
Again, you're not reading. Read my original comment. And the reply to your comment. I wouldn't use Claude Code in this situation. I'd just type `rclone copy <source> .`.
I see you didn't get the message. It's not about opinions. Don't add a bunch of extra meanings to suit your argument.
The original comment was:
> just use claude code to use rclone on a server and let it run automatically, its great and easy
First, it says "use claude code to use rclone." It's very simple English, yet it directly contradicts your claim that "you're not even using Claude code to run rclone for you."
> Because that's the only way I'd understand someone to go on such rant.
Yeah, no wonder given the above.
Going back to the original comment, it says it's easy. Easier than not using Claude Code, which is typing `rclone copy <source> .`. Every justification that you pulled out of thin air is more complicated than that.
> Is this what you'd do?
Again, you're not reading. Read my original comment. And the reply to your comment. I wouldn't use Claude Code in this situation. I'd just type `rclone copy <source> .`.