The California Aqueduct at Mendota, California on March 11, 2009. The Aqueduct carries water from the San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta in the north to farms and cities in the central and southern part of the state. Credit: ROBYN BECK/AFP/Getty Images

Southern California is thirsty for water, and Governor Jerry Brown has made it one of his missions to deliver the goods. In his State of the State today, Brown endorsed a $14 billion proposal that would modernize California’s water distribution system. Currently, water flows from the North through the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta’s earthen levees before making its way down South. But many find this process inefficient, outdated and suspect to damage from earthquakes.

Thus, Brown and California Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar have proposed building two water tunnels that go underground, bypassing the delta entirely. Environmentalists have long been concerned with the pumps used by the levees, as they are harmful to endangered populations in the delta. But that doesn’t mean they are immediately jumping on board to support this new plan. They stress there is still a great deal of analysis needed to be done before a proper opinion could be formed. However, many of those in Southern California, especially those with interests in farming, say that timing is crucial and the process must start now.

So how will the plan move forward without putting the environment in danger? Who benefits most from these water tunnels? Does anyone lose out? What are the risks of doing nothing and just keeping the delta system in place?

Barry Nelson, Senior Policy Analyst for the NRDC’s Water Program

Will GenoDroid allow you to be able to compare DNA just by bumping cell phones? Credit: freakpower/KPCC

It’s a given these days that your phone has become, for better or worse, as much a part of you as your eye color. But could it actually carry your DNA?  Yes, say researchers at University of California’s computer sciences department.  They’ve developed a smartphone app that will eventually be able to store your entire genome, giving you the ability to read, share and swap genetic information with your doctor or even a potential marriage partner.

Genetic information can currently be obtained from companies like 23&Me for a few hundred dollars; the GenoDroid would keep that code handy and encrypted, with only small sequences available on a “need to know” basis, such as managing your health care. The GenoDroid can instantly solve a paternity question or calculate the odds of you and a partner having a child with a genetic disease. The availability of such personal data, however, opens up the potential for mismanagement. How to keep your genome sequence from being revealed to insurance companies, employers or law enforcement?  Bumping phones on a first date might seem like fun, but what if it reveals that you and your new friend are genetically incompatible – or distantly related?  And if your DNA information is lost or stolen, you can’t just change it like you can your PIN number. Public policy, currently a patchwork of state-by-state rules, has yet to catch up with a workable solution for these and other questions.

Who is responsible if genetic privacy is breached? What would you like to know about your genetic profile? And who would you feel comfortable sharing it with?

Gene Tsudik, Ph.D, professor of computer science, Donald Bren School of Information and Computer Sciences, University of California at Irvine and one of the creators of the GenoDroid app

Jeremy Gruber, president, The  Council for Responsible Genetics

In this handout photo provided by the U.S. Navy, Lt. j.g. Luke Leveque, assigned to the Gold crew of the ballistic missile submarine USS Maryland, pins the submarine officer warfare device on his wife, Lt. j.g. Marquette Leveque, assigned to the Gold crew of the ballistic missile submarine USS Wyoming, at Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay on December 5, 2012 in Kings Bay, Georgia. Leveque is one of three Sailors to become the first female unrestricted line officers to qualify in submarines. Credit: U.S. Navy/Getty Images

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has announced officially that women will no longer be banned from front-line combat. On paper, women have been excluded since a 1994 Pentagon rule, but in practice tens of thousands have served in conflict. That fact sparked lawsuits by service women who were precluded from promotion without accredited combat experience.

This  move was recommended by the military itself - the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It also appears to have bipartisan support in Washington. However, there are soldiers - from ranks high and low - that worry it could weaken unit cohesion and that it ignores gender differences.

How will this change affect the war-fighting capability of U.S. Forces? How have women been serving the military until now? What exclusions might have to be made, such as Navy SEALs and similar Special Forces units? What exceptions will be made for military families - could both spouses go to the front lines? How long could it take to integrate these changes? How could this affect unit cohesion in infantries and other teams that don't currently have female involvement?

In recent times, we've learned of more sexual assaults of service women - what's being done to fix that? Legal scholars are saying women will no longer be excluded from selective service - what does that mean? And what about if conscription ever returned?

Guests:

Hal Kempfer, retired Marine Lieutenant Colonel and CEO of KIPP (Knowledge and Intelligence Program Professionals)

Ariela Migdal, senior staff attorney with the ACLU Women’s Rights Project

Mr. Kingsley Browne, Professor of Law at Wayne State University Law School, author of “Co-ed Combat: The New Evidence That Women Shouldn’t Fight the Nation’s Wars”

Actors Amanda Seyfried, Hugh Jackman, Anne Hathaway, director Tom Hooper and actor Eddie Redmayne attend the NBCUniversal Golden Globes viewing and after party held at The Beverly Hilton Hotel on January 13, 2013 in Beverly Hills, California. Credit: Jason Kempin/Getty Images for NBCUniversal

Today, Tom Hooper stops by the studio to sit down with Larry Mantle and discuss the making of his new film “Les Miserables,” and why he chose to undertake such an ambitious project. The film has been positively received thus far, and won three Golden Globes: Best Comedy or Musical, Best Supporting Actress and Best Actor in a Comedy or Musical.

Some critics predict this steam will provide momentum for the film to make a splash at the Academy Awards. Hooper’s last film, “The King’s Speech,” took home Best Picture in 2010. Will he grab the brass ring again this year? What did you think of the film adaptation of this legendary musical?

Tom Hooper, director of Oscar-nominated Les Misérables

The Rose Bowl Credit: Andres Aguila/KPCC

West Pasadena resident Michael Vogler has spearheaded a campaign to recall City Councilman Steve Madison, thanks to a dispute over use of the Rose Bowl.  Last November, Pasadena City Council members voted 7-1 to allow expanded use of the Bowl for major events, from 12 per year to 25. This paves the way for an NFL team, should one move to Los Angeles, to take up temporary residence in Pasadena while waiting for a stadium to be built for them.

But the move has angered nearby residents and others who regularly use the Bowl grounds for soccer games, picnics, running and other activities.  NFL games would cut down on time for public use of the grounds, and neighborhood residents fear the traffic, unruly fans and environmental headaches that would ensue on game day.  On his website, Vogler writes that Madison “sold out the people that he was elected to represent by voting for a plan which will allow the NFL to play at the Rose Bowl” and that he’s “willing to sell our weekends and precious family time to the highest bidder.”  

There have also been accusations of conflict of interest; Madison works for a law firm who has represented NFL interests in the past. Madison has pushed back, filing a rebuttal that labels the recall effort a “misguided” attempt to “circumvent the will of the voters” who elected him.  The Rose Bowl is in need of expensive repairs, he points out, and Pasadena could use the injection of revenue from NFL games. But it seems Madison may have a fight on his hands to keep his city council seat.  Supporters of the recall must now gather 2,800 signatures to force a vote, 20% of the approximately 14,000 registered voters in the district.

Are you a regular user of the Rose Bowl grounds?  Would you be willing to give up some of the time you spend there to make room for an NFL team? Should a city councilman be subject to recall for casting an unpopular vote?

Michael Vogler, attorney, secretary/treasurer for the Committee to Recall Steve Madison

Steve Madison, Pasadena City Councilman, District 6

(L-R) Taylor Hackford, Jennifer Lopez, Jason Statham and Patti LuPone attend a screening of "Parker" hosted by FilmDistrict, The Cinema Society, L'Oreal Paris and Appleton Estate at MOMA on January 23, 2013 in New York City. Credit: Stephen Lovekin/Getty Images

Larry is joined by KPCC film critics Andy Klein from the L.A. Times Community Paper chain and Lael Loewenstein  from Variety to review the week’s new film releases including Parker, Tabu, John Dies at the End, Knife Fight and more. Also, Peter Rainer from the Christian Science Monitor checks in to share the latest updates from the Sundance Film Festival. TGI-FilmWeek!

Parker           

Tabu

John Dies at the End

Andy Klein, film critic for KPCC and the L.A. Times Community Papers chain

Lael Loewenstein, film critic for KPCC and Variety

Peter Rainer, film critic for KPCC and for the Christian Science Monitor

US tennis star Venus Williams (1stR) and her sister Serena Williams (2ndR) participate on November 3, 2012 in a two-hour tennis clinic with disabled children in wheelchairs at the Arthur Ashe Academy in Soweto. Credit: STEPHANE DE SAKUTIN/AFP/Getty Images

 The U.S. Department of Education clarified today that K-12 schools cannot exclude students with disabilities from after-school athletics and clubs. Officials explained that they are not looking to change sports teams, but “reasonable modifications” need to be implemented for disabled students who can compete with their classmates. For example, if a deaf runner wanted to compete in track and field, schools could use a visual cue instead of a starter pistol. Some schools have already made modifications.

For a blind wrestler in Chicago, his competitors must maintain physical contact with him during the match. In Ohio, a track student competes in a racing wheelchair but cannot have other students run alongside him. Other alternatives would be setting up parallel adaptive sports programs for students with disabilities. The Department of Education said that these legal obligations are a matter of equal opportunity civil rights. When Title IX instructed schools to treat female athletics equally with male athletics, many considered it a victory for women’s rights. There was increased female participation in sports, but also consequently many schools cut budgets for men’s teams.

Is this initiative parallel to Title IX for women? Will more students with disabilities participate in sports? How will this affect school budgets? Also, how can modifications be made for different types of mental and physical disabilities? Is this fair to other competitors?

Terri Lakowski, CEO of Active Policy Solutions, which provides government relations and advocacy support to clients; specializing in sports, health, wellness, youth development, and civil rights policy and an expert on youth sports policy in the United States

Bob Gardner, Executive Director, National Federation of High School Associations

Bev Vaughn, Cofounder and Executive Director of the American Association of Adapted Sports Programs, a non-profit organization with the mission to develop and support a standardized structure for school-based athletic competition to improve the well-being of students with physical disabilities

A U.S. Predator drone flies through the night sky over Kandahar Air Field in Afghanistan. Drone strikes ordered by the Obama administration have killed more than a dozen al-Qaida leaders around the world. Credit: Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP

Last week Senator John Kerry signaled a possible change of policy on the use of drones. During his confirmation hearing for Secretary of State, Kerry said "we cannot afford a diplomacy that is defined by troops or drones or confrontation," according to the LA Times. His comments came on the heels of a United Nations announcement. Its launching an investigation into U.S. and U.K. drone strikes at the request of Pakistan and two unidentified permanent members of the U.N. Security Council. The investigation is tasked with determining if drone strikes have killed civilians. The investigation could change U.N. resolutions on drone strikes.

The Obama administration has publicly acknowledged targeted killing operations, justifying their usage because it protects American lives and prevents potential terrorist attacks. According to the Associated Press, there were 35 strikes in Pakistan in 2008 under the George W. Bush administration. Under President Barack Obama’s administration, drone strikes rose to 117 in 2010. That number fell to 64 strikes in 2011 and 46 strikes in 2012. Although targeted killings through drones have been used by the U.S. as well as other countries, this war tactic has been met with disapproval. Other issues regarding the usage of drones have been raised. The American Civil Liberties Union have filed multiple lawsuits against the U.S. for killing civilians, eliminating targets without due process of law and the lack of oversight in this CIA program.

What are the strategic ramifications of drone use? How do they affect international relations? Is a policy shift likely?

A collection of Oscar statuettes in Brentwood, California on February 24, 2012 Credit: Toby Canham/Getty Images

It’s awards season in Hollywood, but celebrities aren’t the only ones passing around golden statues. These days, you’re likely to see awards given out in every industry under the sun, from best closet organizer to longest beard. Not to mention the thousands of “recognitions of participation” certificates handed out on a daily basis. Surely preciously trees need not be slaughtered to remind someone simply that they were present at something, right? Or is there a method to this seeming madness?

Businesses swear by these events as a means of boosting employee morale, especially during these post-recession times when workers are logging more hours in understaffed offices. What exactly goes into putting on one of these events? How do they recreate the sensation of being on the red carpet at the Oscars with a very non-Oscars budget? And what about after the awards are over? Some people proudly show off their awards for all to see. Do they get a motivational kick from seeing them?

Meanwhile, others get awards which get shoved in a drawer or thrown in the trash. What gives? Are they ashamed of the attention, or just generally over it? Does it have more to do with one’s personality than the awards themselves? Do awards actually inspire employees to produce better work? What do you do with your awards?

Troy Halsey, founder and CEO of The Halsey Group LLC author of “Freelancer’s Guide to Corporate Event Design” (Focal Press, 2010)

Beth A. Livingston, Assistant Professor of Human Resource Studies at Cornell University’s School of Industrial and Labor Relations

US Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) speaks before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee during a hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on January 23, 2013. Credit: SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images

In a rare moment of bipartisanship in Washington, eight leading senators have reached a consensus proposal for immigration reform. The key players are Democrats Chuck Schumer, Richard Durbin, Robert Menendez and Michael Bennet, and Republicans John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio and Jeff Flake. They have met five times since the November election, after which Republicans began to embrace the idea of reform after the huge Latino turnout and its effect on the polls. Due to this political climate, and the fact that both parties are eagerly working together, immigration experts are bullish on actual progress being made.

The plan would allow for a path to citizenship for the 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States, as long as they pay back taxes, a fine and pass a background check. Then, they would be on probationary status until the government deems the border between the U.S. and Mexico secure. After which, those affected could get a green card, and thus permanent residency.

Meanwhile, President Barack Obama is expected to deliver his plan for immigration reform tomorrow in Las Vegas. His proposal is expected not to include the condition that the border must be secure before granting legal status, and political analysts believe that the final result will be somewhere in between. While the Senate and the White House are both moving forward on this, pressure will ultimately fall to the House of Representatives, in which the dominant party represents some districts where reform is a four-letter word.

So how will this all shake out? What are the details of the Senate’s plan? Will it clash significantly with Obama’s plan? And how bipartisan will this be when it’s all said and done?

Steven Camarota, Director of Research for the Center for Immigration Studies

Angelica Salas, Executive Director of CHIRLA, Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights Los Angeles 

Doyle McManus, Washington columnist for the Los Angeles Times

LGBT rights supporters march in front of Congress. Credit: Brendan Smialowski/Getty Images

How will transgender rights change during President Obama’s second term? In October 2012, Vice President Joe Biden called transgender equality “the civil rights issue of our time,” but although the president’s second term inauguration speech directly addressed gay rights, he has yet to speak about transgender rights.

The term transgender is used to describe people whose biological sex does not match their self-perceived gender, and who may have non-conforming gender expression. Transgender and gender non-conforming people frequently face discrimination in healthcare, public schools, public spaces, and the workplace. Transgender youth have statistically higher rates of homelessness, suicide, and self harm.

The Obama administration has made some contributions to transgender rights already, including adding gender identity to the non-discrimination clauses for federal housing. The the Employment Non-Discrimination Act has been introduced in Congress every year since 1995, and has included protections for non-conforming gender identity and expression since 2011, but has never yet passed. 

How could transgender rights change in the next four years, socially and politically? What kind of federal legislation might feasibly pass -- what kinds of protections should be provided? Should gender identity discrimination be handled on a national level, or by individual states?

Shannon Minter, lead counsel in the California Prop 8 appeal case and legal director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights in San Francisco

Ilya Shapiro, senior fellow in constitutional studies at the Cato Institute and editor-in-chief of the Cato Supreme Court Review

Firemen cross a street as a broken 16-inch gas main burns in the background, 17 January 1994, after an earthquake, measuring 6.6 on the Richter scale, struck the San Fernando Valley area. Officials confirmed 28 deaths resulting from the quake. Credit: HAL GARB/AFP/Getty Images

If an unexpected disaster of the magnitude of Hurricane Katrina or Superstorm Sandy hit populated areas of California, would we be ready? Many think a disaster of that scale could come in the form of a massive earthquake, which would hit suddenly and without warning.

Today, California state senator Alex Padilla is sponsoring legislation to fund an earthquake early warning system to buy millions of Californians crucial seconds that could save countless lives and dollars. The system would be made up of a network of sensors in the ground that, when shaken, would alert distant cities of the coming earthquake. In theory, if the system detected a quake in the Bay Area, it could give Angelenos up to a full minute of warning -- time that could be used to get children in classrooms to safety or maybe stop a train hauling toxic material.

What is the science behind a system like this? Does the cost  seem worth the expense if it only buys us a minute?

Alex Padilla, Democratic State Senator from California's 20th State Senate district which encompasses the San Fernando Valley.

Douglas Given, geophysicist and Early Warning Project coordinator, can speak about the science behind the system

US President Barack Obama delivers remarks on immigration reform at Del Sol High School in Las Vegas, Nevada, January 29, 2013. Credit: JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images

It was only yesterday that we were discussing an immigration deal put together by leaders in the Senate. Now, President Barack Obama himself is weighing in on the issue. Obama has already shown himself to be committed to making changes in this area, as he fought hard for the DREAM Act when it was reintroduced in 2012, as well as deciding not to punish young immigrants who were brought to the United States illegally. And after the November election, which saw massive Latino influence on the polls, Obama again reminded the electorate of his dedication to the cause.

With Republicans assessing the political climate, it looks like some meaningful immigration reform could actually happen. Experts predict that Obama’s plan will align closely with the one reached by the Senate, although it will diverge on one very important point. The Senate deal calls for a secured border to be established between the U.S. and Mexico before amnesty is granted to immigrants, whereas Obama most likely won’t make that same caveat.

In what other ways do the proposals differ? Where will a compromise land? Do you think Obama’s speech goes far enough? Too far?

RELATED: Click here to watch a live feed of the speech

Guests:
Josh Gerstein, White House Reporter for POLITICO

David Grant, Congressional Correspondent, The Christian Science Monitor

A boy scout troop. Credit: RDECOM/Flickr

The Boy Scouts of America may lift its ban on gay members and leaders as early as next week. The BSA reaffirmed its prohibition of homosexuals in July 2012 and has since come under fire for what many consider to be outdated and discriminatory policies. The Scout’s national board will discuss reforms to the ban next week as part of what they say has been an ongoing dialogue.

The end of the exclusion of gay Scouts and leaders will likely be opposed by some religious groups and more conservative troops. BSA spokesperson Deron Smith says the new policy would reflect a change at the national level – while the Boy Scout institution would allow Scouts and troop leaders of any sexual orientation, individual troops would retain their autonomy and the power to “accept membership and select leaders consistent with each organization’s mission, principles, or religious beliefs.” There is no timeline yet for the potential lift of the ban.

Why is the BSA deciding to do this now?What could be the effect of giving local Boy Scout troops more independence? Will the change in policy really change much if local troops are still allowed to exclude gay members and leaders? Is the BSA’s possible progressive shift the latest in a sweeping societal sea change in attitudes towards gay people? Could this change your opinion about the Boy Scouts or your decision to involve your child?

Rabbi Sarah Hronsky, Temple Beth Hillel – Valley Village; Temple Beth Hillel sponsors two units of the Los Angeles branch of Boy Scouts of America, Cub Scout Pack 311 and Boy Scout Troop 36

Peter Sprigg, Senior Fellow with the Family Research Council (FRC), a non-profit organization that aims to advance faith, family and freedom in public policy and to promote culture from a Christian worldview

New York University (NYU) students cheer after receiving their degrees at their graduation ceremony. Credit: EMMANUEL DUNAND/AFP/Getty Images

Starting next fall, the University of Wisconsin system is offering the first competency-based online degree program in the nation. This program, called the “UW Flexible Option,” will allow adult students to earn a bachelor’s by passing a series of assessments that determine competency in a field of study.

The UW Flexible Option targets working adults who never completed a bachelor’s degree for various reasons and want to increase their job opportunities and salaries with an advanced degree. Also, for those who received on-the-job training but no formal education in that career, UW Flexible Option’s assessments hope to determine if those acquired skills are equivalent to a bachelor’s degree. Those who enroll in this program will have access to the UW resources and graduate with a traditional degree, but be able to take classes whenever they want without ever stepping foot onto the university.

But does a degree earned “off campus” have the same caché - and value - as a traditional degree? Does offering this option devalue the University of Wisconsin brand? With universities facing increasing costs and decreasing resources, could “flexible” learning be the direction of higher education? Is it possible to have the university experience without being physically present at the university?

Guests:
Aaron Brower, provost, University of Wisconsin Extension

Barmak Nassirian, independent higher education policy consultant, formerly Associate Executive Director, American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO)

Join AirTalk for a live taping about "The Future of Public Higher Education in California" on Thursday, January 31st, from 6:30 P.M. to 8 P.M. at the National Center for the Preservation of Democracy. Click here for more information and to RSVP.

The Earth as seen from space. Credit: NASA Goddard Photo and Video

The common perception is that as time marches on, the human population will continue to rise. Advances in technology and health will lead to longer lives, and thus the Earth will be burdened by billions upon billions of hungry mouths to feed, both young and old. And not just food, but oil, land, water and other resources will be gobbled up until there isn’t enough to go around.

But recently, some studies have found that birth rates seem to be leveling off across the globe. This has long been the case in developed countries, but now it looks like developing countries are slowing down as well. Typically, it was these nations which kept the total reproductive rate for the human race at a satisfactory point to replenish the numbers every generation. It looks like by the end of this century, that may no longer be the case.

While differing accounts show population shrinkage or just a plateau, many demographers are convinced that the population boom, which has been going on since humanity began, is finally over. Not everyone agrees with this assessment, however, and stress that the damage has already been done. We have grown so much that no amount of dwindling could counteract the impact we’ve already made on our planet.

So what does this mean for humanity? Are we headed out? Or are we going to continue to explode in numbers? Which science fiction future are you more looking forward to?

Guests:
Warren Sanderson, Professor of Economics, Stony Brook University and researcher with the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

Phil Cafaro, Professor of Philosophy at Colorado State University, works with CSU’s College of Global Environmental Sustainability

Five candidates for Los Angeles mayor participate in their first televised debate on January 28, 2013 at UCLA. Credit: NBC LA

The L.A. mayoral candidates have been trumpeting their endorsements, but there’s one big fish yet to land: SEIU Local 721, the powerful union that represents roughly 10,000 City Hall employees.  The Service Employees International Union has yet to throw their weight behind a candidate, even though they met with the four leading candidates - City Controller Wendy Greuel, City Councilmembers Jan Perry and Eric Garcetti and attorney Kevin James - two months ago. But there are signs the nod will come soon; they’ve called Greuel and Garcetti back for a second interview, to be held this evening.

It’s no secret that the union was unhappy with current mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and the City Council after budget cuts led to recent layoffs of over 350 city workers.  Garcetti, who was council president at the time of that decision, is no doubt in for some tough questioning by the union.

Which candidate will inspire city workers to get out the member vote? What promises will he or she have to make? Does the union endorsement mean the election?

Guest:
David Zahniser, reporter with The Los Angeles Times

Airtalk hosts a debate between the four leading mayoral candidates, live in our Crawford Family Forum, moderated by Larry Mantle. Wednesday, February 6th at 7:00 p.m.  Admission is free, but reservations are required.  Submit your questions for the candidates on the event page:
http://www.scpr.org/events/2013/02/06/airtalk-los-angeles-mayoral-debate

President of the American Academy of Family Physicians, Dr. Michael Fleming sits at his desk on March 19, 2004, in Shreveport, LA. Credit: Mario Villafuerte/Getty Images

Americans sit for an average of 9.3 hours per day, but this seemingly banal fact may be more profoundly damaging to our health than we realize. After one hour of sitting, the production of enzymes in the human body that burn fat declines by as much as 90 percent. Extended sitting, which is six hours or more of minimal activity per day, has been linked to increased risk of obesity, heart disease, diabetes, breast cancer and colon cancer.

But not everyone is taking this growing problem sitting down. Employees are coming up with creative ways to fend off this sedentary lifestyle. Perhaps you’ve seen someone in your office with a standing desk. Or maybe you’ve been asked to join in on a “walking meeting.” Do you have any tricks of the trade to share with other listeners for how to stay healthy given these circumstances?

Are we unknowingly harming our bodies by sitting too much? How damaging really is the lack of physical activity? What can be done to avoid this unhealthy lifestyle? Are you planning on bringing your treadmill to the office?

Christian K. Roberts, Ph.D., Assistant Research Professor at the UCLA School of Nursing, Principal Investigator of the Exercise and Metabolic Disease Research Laboratory at UCLA

A "for sale" sign stands outside an existing home in Pasadena, California. A report shows U.S. home prices accelerated in November compared with a year ago, pushed higher by rising sales and a tighter supply of available homes. Credit: David McNew/Getty Images

KPCC reporter Matt DeBord joins Larry to discuss the rise in home prices in Los Angeles. How will changes to the housing market affect you? Will this dissuade you from buying a home? Do investors throw off prices? How could this affect rentals?

Matt DeBord, KPCC reporter

Thorsten Heins, president and chief executive officer of BlackBerry, presents the company's new phones: BlackBerry Z10 and the BlackBerry Q10 at its launch in New York City January 30, 2013. Credit: Courtesy Hartmann Studios/BlackBerry/Flickr

Start cracking those thumbs, because the Blackberry is back. Research in Motion, the Canadian company behind Blackberry, unveiled its new operating system today. In an effort to compete directly with Apple and other smartphone manufacturers, it rolled out two phone models, the Z10 and the Q10.

The Z10 is more in the vein of an iPhone, with a fully functional touch screen and no physical keys. It also possesses software which learns the way users type, and thus their mistakes, as a means to anticipate and fix them later. The Q10 may be the choice for Blackberry purists, as it retains the cherished keyboard so many preferred to typing clumsily onto a screen. But are there even any Blackberry purists left? The smartphone industry has been charging ahead for years, and Research in Motion has stood completely still. In an effort to consolidate the brand, Research in Motion changed its name to Blackberry.

But is all of this too little too late? Is it possible for the once king of cell phones to work its way back up from fifth place? Where does your loyalty stand at this point? Will you shirk your iPhone for the longer battery life of a Blackberry? Have you kissed the keyboard goodbye, or are you aching for another round of Blackberry thumb? How are the reviews of the new phones thus far? Are rumors of Blackberry’s death greatly exaggerated?

Guest:

Andrea Chang, technology reporter for the Los Angeles Times covering the new Blackberry