"Donating his stash" means "printing more BTC" to you?
Absolutely not, which is the point I am making.When you said "unless you're Satoshi..." I took that in reference to it being impossible to print any more bitcoin. Reading the line that I quoted from you again, perhaps your intended meaning was that bitcoin could not be used to fund wars, unless Satoshi donated their stash? I don't strictly agree with that either, though. Bitcoin can be used to fund anything, if it is owned in sufficient quantities by the "right" people. I think it is fairly likely that a number of governments around the world are holding not insignificant amounts of bitcoin.
That way they could capture a huge share of the BTC hashrate (and maybe even perform a 51% attack if they're malicious enough).
Will they do it? Most likely not. They would have to abandon their other customers (Apple, nVidia, AMD etc.) and the global economy (totally dependent on microchips) would collapse. That will happen when China invades Taiwan either way, but that's another discussion.
So yeah, there are potential ways to fund wars with BTC, but it would be extremely difficult and counterproductive. Just like it was possible to fund wars with gold, but it's very hard to extract huge amounts of gold.
With fiat USD it's easy-peasy. And yet, you see Americans on this board being "OK" with the fact US taxpayers paid 2 trillion over 20 years to fund a failed war in Afghanistan.
Let's not just blame the FED/US government. Most citizens are pretty dumb too. An enlightened minority cannot go against the majority. At least not in democracy.
In my opinion, TSMC has its own business mission, which is to produce the highest quality chips.
TSMC is a unique company, because a large number of companies produce chips for modern electronics (for example, Samsung), but uncompromising quality is precisely the products of the Taiwanese company TSMC!
Of course, such a company will not expand into the ASIC market and carry out 51 percent attacks.
In general, if we analyze the evolution of Bitcoin, we can conclude that the first cryptocurrency is being introduced into our daily lives very slowly, using every opportunity to take a better position. For example, today I read that the US government is one of the biggest bitcoin whales due to the large amount of confiscated bitcoins. Therefore, after some time, Washington officials may come to the conclusion that it is more profitable for them to introduce bitcoin into the US financial system, rather than ban it.
In my opinion, when Satoshi Nakamoto created Bitcoin, he considered this process as the first stage of a new technical and financial evolution (and his idea was completely successful).
There's a higher chance of BTC reaching 1m USD by June, rather than TSMC devoting their entire production for ASIC chips.
Regarding adoption (Deutsche Bank woes):
https://finbold.com/over-1200-german-banks-can-now-offer-bitcoin-trading-to-their-retail-customers/