 We think of ourselves as Homo sapiens, but with the advent of artificial intelligence we may expect to become Robo sapiens. Specifically what I mean is the introduction of small robots to be implanted in the human brain to augment their mental capabilities will represent the next stage of evolution in which we go from being exclusively biological creatures to a mix of biological and artificial. The relationship between artificial intelligence and economics is a fundamental one. So as with the introduction of any new technology, economic forces will dictate the timing of its adoption and the sectors in which it will be adopted. We can expect artificial intelligence to have a very strong general effect increasing productivity in some sectors more than others. It will transform the way the labor market is organized, it will wipe out whole sectors of the economy, it will create entirely new sectors, and it should induce increases in longevity that will affect the healthcare and many other sectors. Well, in the next few years already we can expect things like driverless cars and robots doing household chores and working in service industries. A little further down the road we can expect brain augmentation, which is the implant of little robots inside our brains. In the longer term future we can expect very big increases in the say 50 year range, very large increases in longevity, can be expected from artificial intelligence technologies. Furthermore we might see whole brain emulation, which is the uploading of our entire consciousness onto other platforms, non-biological platforms. And can it be dangerous in an economic sense? Well, whole sectors of the economy will be wiped down and many people will see their standard of living go down, though we expect the average standard of living to increase due to increase in productivity. But that can be the role of humans in the economy? Well, economic logic dictates that a resource such as human labor will never go unutilized. So humans will do, typically this means that the principle of comparative advantage which governs such relationships would typically stipulate that humans would do the things they're relatively good at. In this case it would mean humans would do things they're relatively not so bad at. An ironic outcome is predicted, this is referred to as Morović's paradox, and it's based on the idea that it's easier to emulate cognitively sophisticated functions with artificial agents than sensory motor functions. And that means humans will be relatively good at things such as gardening, artistry, craftsmanship, etc. and not so good at high level analysis, which where will be replaced? Will artificial intelligence make people happier? Well, this is a very interesting question. So artificial technologies have not made people happier so far. I'm thinking of pharmacological products, drugs to increase improved mood, improve emotional state. They have temporary effects and do not create lasting happiness. There's an indirect channel whereby artificial intelligence could increase happiness potentially, and that is through increasing the standard of living. However, economic history is clear on this point. Over the past couple of centuries there have been huge increases in the material standard of living and income per person, and zero increase in happiness. Indeed, income inequality is associated with less happiness, so that if in the early stages of the introduction of artificial intelligence, some people have better access than others, great inequalities can result and that would actually lower average happiness.