He described how Pay-Per-Last-N-Shares (PPLNS) pools face the risk of miners losing out, whereas Pay-Per-Share (PPS) pools could go out of business due to attacks. A solution offered by decentralized pools, such as implementing bonuses for miners who successfully find a block, introduces additional costs but attempts to disincentivize block withholding by making it less financially viable.

Towns further discussed the limitations of current strategies to prevent block withholding in mining pools. He noted that while various schemes exist, they often require significant changes to the Proof of Work (PoW) system, which may not be justifiable solely to address block withholding issues. The conversation then shifted to the topic of StratumV2 and custom work selection, emphasizing the importance of transparency between pools and miners regarding the contents of their shares. This is essential not only for preventing scams but also for ensuring efficient block propagation performance within pools.

The narrative questioned the logic behind pools refusing payouts for completed work, arguing that damaging one's business reputation and facing potential legal action does not align with a pool's interests. Towns shared skepticism about the feasibility and desirability of changing the PoW system to incorporate oblivious PoW, given that the potential benefits might not justify the effort unless small miners could secure a significant portion of the network's total hashrate.

Finally, Towns touched upon the future of mining technology and the prospect of ASIC heaters potentially altering the market dynamics, suggesting that if a significant shift occurred, more straightforward solutions like statistical checking could become viable. He concluded by reflecting on the role of pool-provided templates in the mining ecosystem, indicating that the debate over mining strategies remains complex and multifaceted.