Elevate Miami, which I wrote about last month, just announced a number of new speakers and, more specifically, a number of new high-rise development projects that will be discussed at the conference. They are (not an exhaustive list):

• Dolce & Gabbana Residences, Miami

• Mercedes-Benz Places, Miami

• Aman and One High Line Residences, New York

• Indian Creek Residences & Yacht Club, Miami Beach

• Edition Residences, Miami

• AGE360, Curitiba, Brazil

What should be clear from this list is that Miami is like a different planet. It is one of the places where the richest people in the world go to spend their money, much of it on real estate. Because of this, you can think of this real estate as a luxury good, which is why so many of them are now branded.

In economic terms, a luxury good is typically defined as a good where demand increases -- more than what is proportional -- as incomes rise. For example, if a person's income goes up by 1%, but their demand for a particular thing goes up by 5%, then this thing would be considered a "luxury good," as opposed to a "normal good."

The technical definition is an income elasticity of demand that is greater than 1. More simply, this just means that as someone starts making more money, they will start spending a greater percentage of their income on luxury goods. This is in contrast to "necessity goods," where it doesn't matter how much money you make, you only need so much toilet paper, for example.

What all of this suggests is that as people from all over the world get rich, they are likely to want more branded residences in a place like Miami. However, the flip side of this dynamic is that as incomes fall, the demand for luxury goods should, in theory, also fall more than what is proportional. It works both ways.

So I'll be curious to hear -- from the developers at Elevate -- how things are going right now. We're at a time in the real estate cycle where everyone is rethinking their strategies. Or maybe, Miami truly is a different planet.

One of the realities that we will have to face in, oh I don't know, 5 or so years, is that there will be a mixture of different cars on the road. Some will operate with drivers. And some will operate with no drivers. Assuming that the cars with no drivers do well at their job, I would imagine that this will become the default. But in the interim, it'll probably be useful to know which is which. And that's why Mercedes-Benz (and probably others) has been working to establish a new internationally-accepted signal for computer-driven cars.

The decision so far: turquoise lights.

The company has just received permits from the states of California and Nevada for its Drive Pilot system, and as part of this, turquoise lights were earmarked for this exact purpose. Supposedly turquoise was chosen because it's distinct and because there's nothing else on the road that uses it. But I think the real reason is that it looks cool and kind of cyberpunk. So I hope this does become the standard way that we all visualize our shift toward autonomy. I can already imagine the long-exposure photography that will follow of our roads.

Images: Mercedes Benz via The Drive

In the spirit of Startup Weekend, I thought it would be interesting to go back in time and pretend to pitch one of the most disruptive innovations of the 19th century: the automobile.

Typically pitches start by first outlining the problem. The idea is to make your audience aware of the pain point, so that they feel excited when you ultimately pitch your solution.

In the case of cars, the incumbent technology would have been horses. So I can imagine somebody standing up and talking about how horses are slow and how they drop stinky poo all over our city streets. And that the time has come for a revolution in personal mobility! Enough of this crap! :)

But while many of us probably can’t imagine a world without cars, try and put yourself in the shoes of somebody at the end of the 19th century who can’t imagine a world without horses. And then think about all the things we have subsequently done to make cars thrive:

• We paved roads and created networks of freeways.

• We invented rules of the road to ensure that people were operating these new devices properly.

• We created a licensing system to ensure that anybody who was operating a car was doing so relatively safely and following the rules that had been created.

• We created schools that taught people how to be better drivers.

• We started insuring cars for when accidents inevitably happened.

• We started having to accept fatal car accident and pedestrian deaths.

• We built networks of gas stations. As of 2004, there were 168,000 retail locations selling gas in the United States.

• We had to give over large land masses to parking. In fact, we reorganized entire cities so that the car could be better accommodated.

• And we setup government transportation divisions to make sure the needs of the car were always being met.

This is a long list of things we had to do to make cars possible and I’m sure there are many others that I have missed. Today, we all know how disruptive cars have been and we’re certainly questioning many of the things we have done. But we also accept this list as being largely normative.

However, before they were the norm, they were insurmountable challenges. How will we teach everyone how to drive these new cars? How will we minimize accidents? How will we make it easy for people to refuel their cars? Where will people store them when they’re not using them?

There were a lot of moving parts to figure out. 

Which is why people like Paul Graham have argued that the best ideas almost have to live in your unconscious mind. Because your conscious mind would simply reject them as viable options as soon as you started thinking about all the required moving parts. I guess that’s why they say there’s a very fine line between crazy and brilliant.

Image: Benz Velo