If all the password managers in the world fail at this site, it's still a problem with the password managers. The fact that the field was looking as non-editable from the start has nothing to do with the fact that it filled the wrong field.

The user also had a chance to see how it filled the form and didn't bother checking.

>it filled the wrong field

I agree, this is awful (I'd really like to know how on earth it decided that this field is where the expiration year belongs. It sounds like some extremely aggressive assumptions are being made).

>The user also had a chance to see how it filled the form and didn't bother checking.

It's impossible to overstate how wrongheaded, unproductive, and, frankly, lazy this sentiment is.

> The user also had a chance to see how it filled the form and didn't bother checking.

So ... you're saying it's the their own fault and Substack should keep the money?

It's definitely not Substack's fault. They presented the user a form to fill, the user used some tool to fill it and it failed.

Whether Substack should keep the money is a matter of goodwill, it's no different from the user fat-fingering an extra zero.