My only real concern would be a decrease in the number of nodes, as that could indeed lead to centralization! As long as the incentives are aligned, I don't see any issue.

First, it's already happening with big pools excluding transactions in order to be OFAC compliant, and yet those pools are only getting bigger. Not all censorship results in financial loss that would actually make miners leave due to their bottom-line shrinking. Those accusations against @OCEAN were ridiculous because OCEAN had and still has such a small percentage of the hash rate that any transactions they intentionally excluded would have made it into the very next block, and their intention was ALWAYS to let the individual miners make their own block templates, which we can now do, so OCEAN has no say in what makes it into a block. Meanwhile, all it takes is two entities to collude and they can keep transactions out of 90% of blocks, which has a meaningful impact on how long it could take for those transactions to be included by a smaller pool. Most mining companies would not solo-mine, because they need the consistent revenue. The point is, if a solution to the problem exists, and it does. DATUM works. Then more pools should adopt it, or miners should move to pools that it can be used with.