In the past yes, but today most of the tools are designed to focus on one project/project domain. For example you cannot filter session replays by website so you just have a jumble from a bunch of projects if you put them on one subscription and some analytics tools price with "1 site", "3 site" on different price points etc.
The accounting thing - yes maybe I should look at that.
You're absolutely right about DB and other aspects like that. We should do that for postgres.
Your world view decries a youthful attitude to the lessons of history. The cycles of history ran before 1950...
The pendulum between attitudes to morales and conservatism does not always go in one, extinction-laden direction. Just look at the continuous rise and fall of conservative Christian views and norms, which has typically risen in times of scarcity and danger, and fallen with abundance. In the cycle of history, like Rome, wealth tends to grow as morales have reduced in their significance for managing society, only for the pendulum to be reset entirely by a populist figure or revolutionary, or through reforms that forcibly redistribute and tax wealth (as in the history of Rome). There is no single human force more powerful than fear meeting order, which is another description for the typical seed of conservatism.
A great example is Christianity in the UK: There were periods of persecution (hence many groups in the US now extinct in the UK), and periods of lax morales, largely driven by the economy and success of the local and world economy. Contrast that with Ireland which has similar religious dynamics except religion remains culturally important to the current older generation, which is about 3-6 generations from the famine caused by the UK there and which reinforced religion.
In chaos and lack of order, people turn to religion(faith that is unprovable). It can be a person, a deity, a system. This can happen in the west again. It happened many times in Rome with their sweeping reforms. The idea that culture in a place like Kentucky, which in its fundamental conservative essence, has much in common with countries spanning centuries, and in practice, implements a type of society with more secure order, ending up dominated by culture from the most progressive aspects of the US would follow a trend, but only in the short term of history in the last 70 years. Events that could easily reset the conservatism clock 30-100 years, according to history, include major wars, civil war, or inequality reaching levels where chaos enters the fray. Read about Tiberius, Crassus, Caesar and Gaius in Rome. Germany became more conservative out of a false fear, described in horrible terms of disease. But whatever the cause and speaker, it illustrates how a society losing order, whether through falling economically behind their peers or with a minority against whom to direct the anger of inequality, often turns to inequality. People in the grip of fear don't see logic. In the 1920s, Germany was amongst the more liberal of countries in many ways, ironically.
You should really read Will Durant - Lessons of History and the chapters on the rise and fall of civilisations, cultural transformations and how inequality almost always leads to significant (and generally conservative) reform to order. Maybe you will disagree with the examples, find those omitted, or you will find you can't comprehend how redistributing wealth often leads to a more conservative society obsessed with norms and order - but history is history. I suggest if you really care about the country and citizens of this country remaining safe, you would like to investigate how civilisations fail and end up slaughtering internally, and aim to avoid that fate for your country.
Actually, my view is extremely influenced by history prior to 1950. You cite Nazi Germany, but Nazi Germany was actually a new occurrence. It wasn't from tradition. Hitler was a modern politician, and fascism a new movement. It lends credence to my point, it doesn't take away. The culture that replaced the Nazis, too, was not representative of the culture prior to the Nazi government.
Languages have died prior to 1950. Internationalization comes for all.
Even the Catholic Ireland you cite is a relatively new concept, part of the internationalization of the region. Christianity has a rich history there, but it's only a relatively recent happening that they cared about Papal supremacy; it wasn't a great deal of generations ago that the Church of Ireland was by far the largest, and prior to that, papal supremacy never got that much of a foothold in the region. Presently? 69% of people in the Republic of Ireland believe in God. It's a plurality, but the trend is still down.
Cultures die; any view other than this is ahistorical. Prior to 1950, much of the dialects of French within North America were dead, or close enough that it didn't matter. Quebec is left, but Quebec is considered an oddity. There are a few dialects that are hanging on by a single speaker, but is that really a living culture? Those will be gone in a generation.
Wales was oppressed similarly to Ireland, and Welsh is on the path to dying, too; reactionary pushback won't save it. Try and save the language all you want; it will die. Scots will die, too, despite the pride stereotypical to the region. It's basically already dead; its Wikipedia was written in a fake pidgin of Scots for years, and it took years for anyone to notice.
The failing of civilizations and internal slaughter is inevitable. I agree with that. There's no avoiding it. I think it's funny when people try to avoid it. They will lose, inevitably. My position is without regard for the quality of culture, without concern for what culture is going into, but rather, with full enthusiasm over seeing things turn over, and the reactionary, exclusionary attitudes that come when cultures are near death.
A subculture that will survive for another century isn't filled with people trying to keep it small, it wins via numerical superiority. There's a reason that Latin is the basis of most language in most continents. Californication, in a century, may be known as a Mandarin Shift, or Hindufication. California isn't eternal, but tiny cultures being subsumed by larger ones is.
Certain conservative cultures will stay around, at least for a while. It's likely they'll get bigger, even. Geographically-insular ones rooted in exclusion rather than proselytizing won't, though.
I'm glad we are closer to a shared understanding, but loss of culture isn't what I was adamant against. Just that assuming Kentucky will only move to a California like culture is not sensible. The cycles of history illustrate how fear and chaos typically lead to a desire for order that many would consider right wing, regardless of prior politics.
I agree culture must die over time; any finite container with new input experiences that. But abstract culture doesn't, it cycles. Like the level of social order/norms, freedom and hierarchy in culture.
I'm glad you took up the Germany bit, as I wanted to compare there: What were the two most leftwards countries in the 1920s?
The attempt at democracy in Germany, and Russias liberalisation (e.g. the sexual liberalisation well preceding that in the USA with the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass_of_water_theory)
But today, one country is considered to the left - Germany - and one to the right - Russia?
How can that be if history moves in one direction?
Can it be the present condition or culture of politics has less influence in time than economics and cycles, and trends and ways of human behaviour that have been observed and commented on for thousands of years, like by Will Durant? Why did the Roman empire and Christian nations swing from liberal to conservative views largely with no truly extreme points in long term political mechanisms (relatively speaking) until in both cases their end of dominance, in the Christian case, birth control?
I simply suggest the abstract nature of culture, such as fear, social norms and order as reactions to recent generations experiences are far greater predictors of future political culture than time alone. And one usually sees societies over longer time scale cycle between the strongest norms and conservative attitude, to more liberal ones in times of abundance, and then back in teams of need for order.
You may find that if the population starved, like in history, a strongly social norm based low tolerance society would emerge rapidly. Think about the 90s in Russia or the dole issues. The enforced norms could be left or right wing, but by the lessons of history, they will be enforced absolutely, in a conservative, order-based or dictator-like manner. Freedom and freedom from norms tends to fall away in such times. I think you see part of this wider abstract view, from your last two paragraphs, but viewing history as shifts rather than cycles containing within them eras, is a choice you are making to fit your own vision.
The accounting thing - yes maybe I should look at that.
You're absolutely right about DB and other aspects like that. We should do that for postgres.