Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | aquir's commentslogin

Location: Dorset, UK Remote: Yes. UK remote preferred; London hybrid 1–2 days/week is fine. Willing to relocate: No Technologies: Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central / NAV, AL, C#, Azure, Azure Functions, SQL, REST/OData APIs, Git/GitHub, Azure DevOps, CI/CD, Power Platform, Docker, Python, LLMs/AI agents, MCP, Lean Résumé/CV: Available on request Email: hn@ahforgetit.com

20+ years building, fixing and modernising enterprise software, mostly around Microsoft Dynamics NAV / Business Central. I've worked across development, technical consulting, solution architecture, product and engineering leadership, including leading a ~15-person BC engineering team.

My particular niche is the ugly boundary between business systems and software architecture: deciding what should remain standard ERP behaviour, what deserves custom code, designing integration-heavy systems, untangling legacy implementations, performance work, and stopping twenty years of accumulated technical debt from being faithfully recreated in the cloud.

More recently I've been working heavily with AI-assisted engineering and exploring how LLMs, agents, formal specifications and MCP-style interfaces can change the way enterprise software is designed and maintained. I'm building projects around AI + ERP, including tooling for Business Central and a Lean-based formal model of ERP/accounting behaviour.

I'm looking for Staff/Principal/Architect-level work where deep enterprise systems knowledge is useful rather than embarrassing: Enterprise AI, applied AI for business software, ERP/platform architecture, developer tooling, or technically serious Business Central architecture.

I don't need the next job to be "a Dynamics job." In fact, the interesting problem for me is taking two decades of experience with complex, stateful, business-critical systems and applying it to what we're building next.


What a shame, I've used the Twitter/X -> RSS quite a lot to follow accounts.


Even the metalheads adored her: https://www.reddit.com/r/MetalForTheMasses/comments/1vyofwx/...

As Clarac94 said: "Her philosophy and way of being was metal af, look up her book schemes and charity work and how she stuck up for people like the gay community. She was unapologetically herself, always even when criticised or mocked. RIP Dolly!"


No vibration...what a missed opportunity! The reason that I got into smartwatches is the vibration wake-up alarm


Vibration is precisely what made me sell my brand new (sold out) Pebble watch. No matter the firmware or options (un)chosen, it would randomly vibrate at odd times of the day. Couldn't stand the constant distractions.

Casio G-Shock GW-M5610U back on my wrist where it belongs.


I am with you on this - with vibration alarm, it would be an instant buy. Vibration alarm on the wrist is so much less stressful in the morning, plus it doesn't wake up anyone sleeping next to you. I haven't used audio-based alarms in years.


I'd guess it's likely battery and size consideration.


Plenty of smartwatches are relatively thin and have vibration, and it only uses up battery when it's used. There's no excuse except they probably just wanted to cut costs.


The only thing keeping me on my apple watch is the wakeup.


I'm disappointed because that's what kept me from buying the Amazfit Neo, which is a similar concept to this one. Without vibration it's useless to me. They get so close to a great product and then...


I just open the page and scroll through the first couple of pages…


She is one of my favourite humans. Clever, witty, funny, hot and on the top I love the (timbre of) her voice. I listen to it on the podcast that she does with Michael Steven (The Rest is Science).


Very fast and good UI but the iCloud passwords integration is very poor :(


Hopefully this could be the first good thing about Brexit...this might not get implemented in the UK or there will be a delay!


The way the uk is legislating online stuff lately I’m expecting UK version to be worse than EU


UK already technically banned encryption, causing Apple to remove the encrypted cloud service for UK customers. Check UK's "Investigatory Powers Act (IPA)"


> Hopefully this could be the first good thing about Brexit

Was having lots of people's lives saved by a much faster vaccine rollout not a good thing?


What's to point of all this? Everyone will use Signal or some other E2E encrypted messenger, this is just bone tossing. Useless politicans spending time on useless things.


Chat control takes screenshots of your phone. E2EE is useless. It's government mandated spyware.


They are talking about mandatory on-device scanning. E2E doesn't solve this.


In every authoritarian regime people spent considerable amount of time on workarounds. Underground press, parallel education etc. this is just another iteration of Stasi like regime, just with a nicer suit and better PR.

In reality this should have been rejected wholesale and people proposing this barred from any public sector jobs, or even arrested for terrorist attack attempt (Chat Control fulfils definition of terrorism).


So the EU will just tell Apple and Google to remove Signal from their app stores and 95-99% of the population won’t bother figuring out it exists..


Maybe the EU can work together with Russia on the Max messenger


And as always, the only people who will bother will be the few% who are involved in some sort of illegal activity.


Or automatically suspected.


I don't get why any of these devices are still intact...


Are you willing to potentially be prosecuted to make a point that will ultimately come down to, "The cameras you destroyed are replaced with newly purchased units"?

The way to beat this isn't vandalism, it's getting them banned from every municipality and county in the country, while fighting at state levels for more bans.

It's also silly talk from kids online, just like "Don't vote, burn your local Wal-Mart" is only meant to impress other online children. The rest of us know that you'll neither vote, nor burn down the Wal-Mart.


You get to sacrifice your life one or zero times in your life. Surely there are some terminally ill people who would do it?


I can't speak for anyone else, but I suspect most terminally ill people want to spend time with the people they love, not breaking cameras and working their way through the legal system.


When I'm terminally ill one day I will find some good thing to do similar to vandalizing Flock cameras. If they arrest me, I won't care too much.


Because most of the American public is not as reflexively anti-Flock as HN would lead you to believe. People acting like cameras recording their activities in public is some sort of grave privacy violation are not the norm.

Cameras recording tour activity in malls, and on public roads has been the case since the 90s. Flock became a lightning rod of attention due to ICE, but they don't actually represent any change from the status quo.


A camera in 2026 is not the camera of 1996. Cameras today are connected to active and passive monitoring systems which are much more invasive to privacy. What will a camera be able to do in 2036?


To the contrary, cameras have been able to automatically read license plates since the 70s, and the technology became cheaper and more widely deployed in the 90s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_number-plate_recogni...

At the end of the day, a camera in public can only record images of people in public. That does not and never did require a warrant.


One of the things that is really interesting to me is when people don't update their opinions of some thing when the level of difficulty and cost associated with that thing change. A few decades ago, if a police officer wanted to find the whereabouts of some individual, they would have to do some serious leg work, even with ALPRs, potentially watch many hours of videos, etc.

With Flock that can be reduced to a mere search query across many locales (maybe not even their locale!) with effectively no effort spent.

When the cost changes so dramatically it effectively changes the balance of power and that is something we should, at the very least, deeply consider.


> A few decades ago, if a police officer wanted to find the whereabouts of some individual, they would have to do some serious leg work, even with ALPRs, potentially watch many hours of videos, etc.

The whole point about ALPRs is that the license plate reading is automatic. Even during the 90s, all a police officer had to do was query a database.


In the US, up until the mid to late 2000s, the majority of ALPRs were mounted on the police cruisers. Even when they moved on to installing them in fixed locations, they had two major limitations:

• There were few of them

• The databases were managed by the jurisdiction

To my exact point, by increasing the number of readers and SaaS-ifying the process to enable jurisdictions to opt-in to information sharing, you have meaningfully changed what the technology is capable of and how it can be used.


Motorola built the first national ALPR database in the mid 2000s. Again, what Flock is doing is decades old. It doesn't even look like you dispute this fact.


You keep ignoring my only point.

> Again, what Flock is doing is decades old. It doesn't even look like you dispute this fact.

Scale and level of effort involved matter. How many cameras were reporting to the Motorola database in 2000? 2010? Flock today?

How easy was it to type in “white Chevrolet Tahoe at [intersection]” until you see the one you want, get its license plate and run through the rest of the database?

Who was able to do that? How easy was it?

The sum of many small changes can create a meaningfully different result that we need to evaluate different than the thing that came before.


It is, and always was as straightforward as typing in the license plate number. Do you think indexing a bunch of 7vcharacter strings was beyond the capability of databases in the 2000s?


> they don't actually represent any change from the status quo.

Only in the sense that the frog has been boiled gradually. The mere presence of cameras in public spaces is not the inconsistency that you seem to think it is. A nationwide centralized aggregator is not even remotely the same thing as a privately owned corner store having a purely private video feed of the front door.


How do you think ALPR cameras worked during the 90s? Do you think a technician had to go through each camera individually looking for license plates? The data was aggregated and indexed even during the 90s. Some of those databases were national. The same criticisms being levied at flock would also apply to the status quo 20+ years ago.


Again you are pointing out the similarities while conveniently ignoring the things that have changed. It has been a continuous gradual slide. The publicized flock examples make clear that the nature and scope of the queries that can be run against modern systems are far beyond what was possible in the 90s. The databases are also far larger.

You are the person arguing that because you're allowed to pick up a pebble it follows that you are permitted to scoop up a handful in a bag thus by extension it's okay to grab a small bucket full thus it must logically follow that filling up the trunk of your car is acceptable therefore no one has any grounds to object to the dump truck and excavator that you've engaged to illegally mine gravel along the side of the road.


Where's the basis for the claim that Flock was the first nation-wide ALPR aggregator? The source mentions that Flock aggregated data on a national level, but doesn't say that it was the first to do so. In fact it doesn't really offer any tangible thing that differentiates this from the decades old systems that predate flock.

It's more like trucks are have been mining gravel from this pit for decades, and the courts have repeatedly affirmed that it's legal to one gravel.


I never claimed flock was the first - you just invented that whole cloth. It also entirely misses the point I just made (intentionally I think). Different degrees of the same thing can and should be treated differently.

I am not singling out flock here. I am merely observing that a given behavior having been deemed legal or constitutionally protected in one context does not necessarily translate over to another. Your previous line of argument justifying that the practices of flock et al are legal depends on such specious reasoning.


> The publicized flock examples make clear that the nature and scope of the queries that can be run against modern systems are far beyond what was possible in the 90s

Then how is "the nature and scope" of Flock different? You didn't actually bother to explain what you meant here. In your earlier comment you emphasized that flock's aggregation is nationwide, which is why I was under the impression that is what you were referring to.


Can you find a dozen cases of cops using these to stalk people in the 90s? If not, that's a large change in the status quo, as that's what's been happening with Flock.


Right? The installers conveniently made them within baseball bat range. Luckily, we don't have them where I live (small West Texas town).


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: