The Fed says this is a cube of $1M. They're off by half a million
307 comments
·July 1, 2025onionisafruit
RajT88
This thread is very informative on your chances of carrying off a heist stealing this cube.
Conclusion: Low, unless you're willing to take only a fraction of the face value.
Thinking through it though - you might be able to get away with spending the cash overseas, where it will take some time indeed for the money to be under scrutiny by banks to see if the serial numbers are out of circulation. There's then problem of getting the money there without anyone noticing, then there's the problem of what kind of characters you're going to be defrauding overseas.
All told - probably a better idea is to use all that cleverness to make a 1.5 million dollars the good old fashioned way: Spending a few years saying, "Nothing from my end" on Zoom calls.
viccis
Man how expensive was that contractor when your art installation requires $1M in cash and all the labor to assemble it, but you can't just tell the contractor to do a new box?
wavemode
The cash probably didn't cost the government anything. They can just use bills that are slated for replacement/removal from circulation.
ftmch
They can just print more money.
kingstnap
Maybe they didn't realize it was wrong until they filled it 66% up.
bobbygoodlatte
Seems pretty on-brand for the Fed
As we say in my family: "close enough for government work!"
mlindner
So who am I supposed to believe the personal blog or the reddit post?
c249709
oof my googling skill so bad I didn't find this
onionisafruit
Mine either. An LLM found it for me.
And I'm glad you didn't find it because that lead to a great post.
sidewndr46
The latest use for AI in 2025: replacing obsolete and non-functional search engines like Google
echelon_musk
If only he had Googled he could have saved himself all the trouble!
mrandish
> For all we know, the middle is just air and crumpled-up old newspaper.
I think this is the answer. I suspect the exhibit designers had a cool idea for a display, did a rough estimate of the area needed and then commissioned the exhibit builders to make the big metal-framed cube. Either they made an error in their calculation or the innate variability in the size of stacks of used bills threw it off. It's also possible the exhibit designer simply decided a bigger cube which filled the floor to ceiling space would be a better visual. Which would be unfortunate because, personally, the exhibit concept I'm more interested in is "$1M dollars in $100 bills fits in this area" not "Here's $1M in bills." The first concept is mildly interesting while the second is just a stunt.
Regardless of the reason it's off, I think it's most likely there's only $1M of bills in the cube. The folks responsible for collecting and destroying used bills tend to be exacting in their auditing for obvious reasons. So when the exhibit designers got $1M in used bills approved and released, that's exactly how much they got. It also stands to reason that they'd design the cube a little bigger than their calculated area requirement to ensure at least $1M would fit (along with some method of padding the interior) - although >50% seems excessive for a variability margin, so I still think it was an aesthetic choice or calculation error. Of course, one could do a practical replication to verify the area required with $10,000 in $1 bills.
Regardless, it's an interesting observation and a cool counting program to help verify.
ggreer
It could be that they measured a stack of bills sitting on a table, then did the math to make a metal frame to contain $1,000,000. But they didn't account for stacks compressing under the weight of higher stacks, and it wouldn't look as nice if the top part of the cube was empty.
Still, it does seem like it would be cheaper to rebuild the case than to add $500k to it. Maybe it's easy for the Fed to acquire more cash as long as it's guaranteed not to be spent.
grogenaut
It's the cost of paper not the dollar value. Also only the outermost bills need be real the rest could just be paper, or voided bills or whatever. But accounting can cover it. It's not gold or pennies where the currency costs what it is worth to make
kasey_junk
Coins don’t cost what they are worth to make.
dyauspitr
What do you mean? The currency in there is spendable isn’t it?
lxgr
> Maybe it's easy for the Fed to acquire more cash as long as it's guaranteed not to be spent.
The Fed doesn't acquire cash, it creates it. USD banknotes are liabilities of the Fed, but that concept only makes sense when somebody other than itself owns them.
meta_ai_x
No. We have a double accounting system. For every $1 it creates, it has to create an equivalent liability.
And when something is budgeted for $1 Million, it is $1m nothing more nothing less
coliveira
Most probably these are voided notes, they actually have zero value because they were taken out of circulation.
jjk166
It costs about $.032 to produce a 1 dollar note, so an extra 500000 new bills would be about $16k.
It could be even cheaper if these were old bills than needed to be pulled out of circulation. In that case they'ed be paying money to dispose of them anyways.
logifail
> Maybe it's easy for the Fed to acquire more cash as long as it's guaranteed not to be spent.
Based on Fed policy since 2007, they may be happy to hand out cash especially if it's going to be spent.
"Money printer go brrr" and all that...
daemonologist
The compression of the bills under their own weight might account for the excessive margin - a lone $100 bundle, even compressed by hand before measuring, probably takes up more vertical space than the ones in the cube.
hidelooktropic
But a bundle is a bundle
null
NoSalt
> "How do I know that's not a bunch of ones with a twenty wrapped around it?"
~ Vincent LaGuardia Gambini
tmtvl
What's a yout?
tmnvix
> I'm more interested in is "$1M dollars in $100 bills fits in this area"
Here's $1,000,000 in $50 notes at the Reserve Bank of New Zealand Museum: https://fastly.4sqi.net/img/general/600x600/2817090_qnRbbX_q...
johnfn
I think this is the most reasonable answer on the thread. As amusing as it is to see everyone come up with zany solutions, it is most likely something boring like this.
Retric
Rather than counting error it’s likely the ~1 ton weight of stacking bills like this would deform the lower sections and possibly stress the glass depending on thickness. So rather than random filler there may be internal structural bracing so the outside of the cube looks nice and neat.
Simplest way to double check is if top and bottom corners have the same bill density.
trhway
may be they started with a $1M and with time the bills weight compresses the bills, and they have periodically to add more to fill the newly forming emptiness. Kind of inflation.
wl
> personally, the exhibit concept I'm more interested in is "$1M dollars in $100 bills fits in this area" not "Here's $1M in bills." The first concept is mildly interesting while the second is just a stunt.
They have that maybe 50 feet away. It fits in a briefcase. Also, $1 million in $20s.
Wowfunhappy
...I actually think you're being too nice. The exhibit implies that this is how big a cube of a million dollars would be. You can use it to get a sense of how much a million is.
If it's 50% too big, that's a serious mistake! They should, like, take down the exhibit until it's fixed. You can't just make one of the bars on a graph taller because it looks more impressive, or your pen slipped, or whatever else. This thing is inaccurate and they should fix it.
goodcanadian
It's funny how all the comments seem to assume the conclusion is correct. I think it is far more likely that it is exactly $1M (plus or minus a couple of percent margin of error), and that the packing isn't uniform. It seems extremely unlikely to me that they would fuck it up so bad as to have $500k more in the box than claimed.
Aurornis
I also think it’s funny that so many comments assume they would have lax accounting for the extra $500K, or that the artists could have casually asked for another $500K of old bills to use as filler and the request would have been granted.
The Fed is extremely rigorous in tracking these things. It isn’t a couple guys in a room playing casually with millions of dollars. Even the retired bills are thoroughly monitored and tracked through their destruction.
wodenokoto
There was a danish artist that got a very large amount of cash to do a similar in spirit artwork.
He then named it “take the money and run” and showcased what amounted to an empty frame.
nemomarx
wasn't he sued by the museum and made to pay it back?
Dylan16807
Non uniform in what way? If all the money in the middle is jumbled up and 50% air that's still extremely misleading. And it's not far off the crumpled up newspaper the article threw in as a possibility.
The conclusion that something is off is still right in that case.
hk__2
See sibling comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44437004
jjk166
I mean the math given showing the size for an actual ~$1M cube is substantially smaller is pretty compelling. The author puts forward the explanation that there may be voids in the cube instead of an additional $500k, but that doesn't really address the problem that this isn't the right size for a $1M cube.
jolt42
The only way to verify is open that sucker up and count.
c249709
in that case you would have to assume they stacked the money first, measured, then build a box to fit it
bboygravity
When you print money by the trillions a million is insignificant. Maybe they're just not good at such small numbers.
jedberg
The Fed keeps rigorous track of every bill. They have a database with the serial number of every live bill. The money isn't valid until the serial is put into the database, and any time a bank gets a bill, they have to verify the serial number is in the database. And if it's not they have to turn it in for a replacement that is.
bboygravity
The thing is that only a tiny amount of all money exists as physical bills. So they can track that all they want, it ain't going to make a dent in the total money supply :p
gosub100
20 years ago before there were as many erosions of personal privacy and before I realized how important privacy was, I thought of a similar system to detect counterfeit money.
Scan it and upload the serial to a database. If that serial has been registered somewhere else, before a plane could possibly transport it there, flag both registers to inspect that bill.
If the serial has already been registered as counterfeit, refuse the currency.
If the serial was not issued by the US mint, refuse the currency.
This would have the adverse effect of flagging valid currency too, but this could be worked around. I think it would make counterfeit much harder and have very little technical cost, since reading the denom and serial is trivial.
wizzwizz4
Is there anywhere I can find out more about this?
whatevertrevor
When you print money by the trillions, tracking every transaction becomes more important not less. I don't know about the exhibit, it is possible that this is not real money too.
jmkni
Kind of off-topic, but I've always thought a good way to suss out what sort of background somebody comes from is to ask them to visualise $1million dollars.
People from a "working class" background tend to see a massive pile of money, more middle class, a smaller pile, upper class maybe a cheque or a small stack of $100 bills or a bank transfer.
It's maybe one of the weirdest parts of the JBR ransom note (getting really off-topic now), "$118,000 dollars be placed into an "adequately sized attaché" consisting of $100,000 in $100 dollar bills and $18,000 in $20 dollar bills."
That would take up a really small amount of space, but if you're never seen that amount of money you might not know that (especially in 1996, pre-internet)
alex_young
IDK, a strap of $100 bills is $10k, so $1M would be 100 of them. Seems sizable. Looks like a strap is about .43 inches tall, so that would make your $1M about 3 and a half feet high or more than a meter tall for the non-imperial afflicted amongst us.
null
SilasX
JBR = JonBenet Ramsey
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Killing_of_JonBen...
ehsankia
Maybe just my biased brain, but the title made it sound like they were half a million under, not over. In some way, this is how 1000 piece jigsaw puzzles will never be exactly 1000 pieces. As long as there's at least 1000, I think most people are fine, especially as an art piece. And of course as mentioned, there's the possibility that there's filler inside.
It would've been much worse if it was under though.
jefftk
The ones that are 25 pieces x 40 pieces are really 1000 pieces. But some puzzles are 27x38 or other more square form factors.
Retric
25x40 is rarely used because non square piece give a lot more info about placement and a 25 X 40 rectangle is almost twice as wide as it is tall. It’s rarely the right kind of aspect ratio.
megablast
> In some way, this is how 1000 piece jigsaw puzzles will never be exactly 1000 pieces.
What??
delecti
Yeah, most jigsaw puzzles do not have precisely the number of pieces advertised. Here's an amusing video (by the channel Stand-up Maths) that does a deep dive into it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXWvptwoCl8
TLDR if you don't have a half-hour: puzzles are usually cut with the pieces on grids, and not all aspect ratios are conducive to that with all piece counts. Like, you might want a 2:3 shaped puzzle with 500 pieces, and 18x28=504 is close enough.
red_admiral
The economist's answer would be to offer to buy the cube for $1.1M. Tell them the extra $100k will fund building another cube plus expenses with spare cash left over. If you're right, pass GO and collect the payout.
nocoiner
It’s obviously not really $1.5mm, if it had been, someone would have picked it up by now.
null
gambiting
Except that whoever built the cube obviously knows how much money they put in. There is an answer out there.
msowers77
I think I saw this cube back in the day, or one like it. I worked at a place called Coin Wrap and we handled sorting and wrapping money for banks, and also wrapped the Sacagawea coins when they came out. One of the trucks came through and had to offload this large cube of money they told us contained 1 million in dollar bills, so they could offload the pallets of coins behind it. I've told people about it but had not seen a picture or knew it was in the Chicago Fed building.
kevin_thibedeau
There are additional stacks hidden by the aluminum framing. Everything is flush against the glass so there are a few more inches on each face not counted in the 102 figure.
voxic11
So you are saying its even more incorrect than the article claims?
c249709
do you know that or just speculating? I couldn't figure it out at the museum.
alfalfasprout
I was curious and looked and yes, there are absolutely bills that seem to go into the framing. It's not a solid aluminum bar it looks L shaped in person.
johnfn
That's not an answer to the problem - it just makes the discrepancy greater.
pavon
I'm guessing that is an illusion due to refraction through thick (plexi)glass.
Otherwise, if the bills really are where they appear, then there would have to be some partial (cut) bills along the edges for everything to line up properly.
reverendsteveii
so it's off by even more than a half mill?
Nextgrid
That still wouldn't account for a 50% shortfall though?
alberth
It's not a shortfall.
The OP says it totals $1.5M ... and extra $0.5M
Modified3019
I wonder how many read the title, and assume it’s about being short. I certainly did.
barrkel
The article talks about 50% extra, not a shortfall.
Brian_K_White
Then another way to say that is that the claim is short.
ticulatedspline
Seems silly at first but in retrospect isn't that surprising to construct from requirements:
1: we want a big cube
2: has to have a million dollars
3: should be stacked neatly.
Given the bills are so evenly arranged on the lower surface there's only so many squares you can produce with the bills like that. 8x19 or 6x17 . 6x17 is noted as close to 1 mill but they only remove 2 stacks from the 100 side. so now it's not a cube, you'd come under if you trimmed it down to a cube.
so stacked flat seems 8x19 is the smallest square you can make for one side for a cube of cash that fits mil. so they did that and just filled it up.
It might be hollow, there's certainly a void. There's some comments about the border but you can clearly see that the bills don't go behind the border so the corners are squared in, which means there's probably a weird void of some sort because it's not really a normal cube.
calibas
The bills look well used, I assume they were going to be retired anyway.
I bring this up because the article and many of the comments here act like this "cost" the Fed $1.5 million to make the cube.
crazysim
I wouldn't be surprised if the bills themselves are marked with specimen or something on the non-visible side. Maybe they're also artificially worn bills produced during bringup or testing.
burnt-resistor
I agree. The "money" probably has the shape and appearance of money, but isn't legal tender out of concern risk management and theft.
The cube is almost certainly hollow, to cut weight and cost.
It's the idea of what a cube of $1m would look like. It should at least fulfill that requirement faithfully.
nativeit
Someone else had mentioned these were retired dollar bills (aka, otherwise headed to the incinerator) but I don't know the provenance of this information.
Scarblac
Well, if it contains 1.5 million, it also contains 1 million.
From a 2014 reddit post[0]:
> This is actually not a million dollars in singles. It is over $1,000,000. The box was created with the wrong dimensions by the contractor, but they still decided to fill it, display it, and claim it is $1,000,000. > > Source: Tour Guide at the Chicago Fed
[0] https://old.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/2f9sp7/one_million_do...