Can you put this on the List?

This is a half bad take. The incentives are broken absolutely, but No one is eagerly complying with daddy OFAC. It’s just way easier to use Foundry or Luxor as a business than it is to build my own block template with a less private pool option.

It sounds that the compliance motivation should be really a hypothesis as there's nothing backing it. Unless @ODELL can confirm it stating that's the insight coming from miners? Fiat may be an explanation here. Miners may want to get the most from the fiat printer so may use leverage as much as they can. When they are leveraged they may not be able to have such variance in their income. They'd need more savings for that. They already need some to cover variance in bitcoin and hashrate prices (some of them also energy prices). Maybe they also don't like to be put in a position when suddenly they're forced to sell bitcoin. It may make sense financially to take on more cheap fiat debt to grow and seize opportunities at the cost of lower bitcoin earnings short-term. Bitcoin standard fixes that. Also the claim that on FPPS you get 20-30% percent less is new and not strongly verified. Currently we just need to take Barefoot Mining word for that although they haven't even released concrete data. Not even which FPPS pools the comparison was done against. It may be as well that miners focus on physical infrastructure and access to energy whilst missing the point that running own software infrastructure shouldn't be outsourced. Lastly why do you assume that Foundry hashrate share will grow? It hasn't grown in the last two years.