

This was already in the plan we approved, right?
Either way, this sounds good to me. Fewer exists means fewer points of friction where drivers want to cut across lanes to catch the exit. Should improve flow once the traffic signal times are tuned.
Plus more bike and pedestrian infrastructure, yes please!

Sure, for a small business this really sucks. Cash flows might be a problem for them after this hit.
But, the burden of fraud losses must fall on something. In my eyes, that means either the individual, the financial institution that facilitated the transaction or the other businesses involved are the only options.
With those options only one entity is capable of building procedures to slow the fraud at scale, properly protect against it, perhaps via insurance or reserved capital with write offs, and is directly involved in the contract creation/transaction, clearly that is the small business here.
The alternatives seem worse to me. The loss of 80k from an individual’s account is crushing. At least the small business has the opportunity to split that loss over a wider group, and has access to business friendly loans.
The payment processors don’t need more reasons to get included in the contract creation or transaction process. They are already exerting their influence on censorship of online stores. And getting regulation to cover the finance sector is a massive uphill battle.
TLDR: sucks that it happened, hope they can stabilize and recover. Alternatives to this seen like bad ideas to me.