Sinks vs Sources

The economy's health comes down to one balance: sinks must outweigh sources. Remove $CPU faster than it's created and the token stays scarce; the other way around and it inflates.

Sources (where $CPU enters)

Source	Notes
WCPU → $CPU cash-out	Paid from treasury when a player exchanges forged WCPU 1:1. The main inflow.
Launch liquidity	The 100 million (10% of the 1 billion cap) minted into the pool at launch.

Sinks (where $CPU leaves)

Sink	Burned?
Build extractor / hub	Spent
Re-reveal a depleted cell	Spent
Forge (per batch)	Spent
Foreign-hub transport & trade fees	Partly burned, rest to hub owners
Pool swap fee on buys	To treasury
Land-sale buyback	Burned

The value flow

                         ┌──────────────────────────┐
   land sales (ETH) ───► │  CPUHook: buy $CPU + burn │ ──► supply ↓
                         └──────────────────────────┘
                                       ▲ burns
   play → spend $CPU → fees ───────────┘
        │
        └─► forge WCPU ─► cash out 1:1 ─► $CPU paid out (supply ↑)   ← the one big source

The invariant

Across the whole system, more $CPU should be burned and sunk than is ever cashed out.

Hold that, and the token is net-deflationary and WCPU stays worth cashing out. Let cash-outs outrun sinks and the model drifts toward the inflation it's built to avoid.