Profile cover photo
Profile photo
pilar starr
explorer of the here and now and sometimes the then and there. i like shiny things, and people, mostly.
explorer of the here and now and sometimes the then and there. i like shiny things, and people, mostly.

pilar's posts

Post has shared content
Decisions, decisions.

Post has shared content
what the eff. what fricking country are we living in???
In what would be a stunning disregard for First Amendment rights, rumors are swirling that the Republican controlled Congress is now considering a new bill that could blackout sites such as YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, and other sites that utilize content generated by users. Phones such as iPhone, Android, AmazonCloud, Pandora, Grooveshark and even your email accounts would be adversely affected.

Post has attachment
more fun?

Post has attachment
do it!

Post has attachment

Post has attachment
need some random hipster filler for your blog/novel/trendy shop flyer? hipster humor, love it!

Single-origin coffee american apparel before they sold out, skateboard mixtape banksy four loko helvetica hoodie cred. Leggings photo booth craft beer, farm-to-table gentrify thundercats VHS echo park shoreditch seitan. Artisan next level homo, letterpress stumptown mustache thundercats cred leggings keytar craft beer pitchfork retro helvetica sartorial. Fap keytar 3 wolf moon, brunch wayfarers biodiesel squid quinoa. Food truck brunch retro jean shorts cardigan, quinoa yr VHS. Gentrify williamsburg american apparel fanny pack. Beard messenger bag tattooed, retro wes anderson wolf organic single-origin coffee Austin sartorial salvia master cleanse.

Post has shared content
photogs - check this out!
500px-Catherine Hall Photo Contest: Exploration of A Muse 2011


I’m partnering with to find the most unique, creative and visually appealing photographic interpretation of the theme “Muse.” 3 winners will get annual premium Awesome accounts from

To join the contest, you need to be in my Google+ Photographers circle. Leave a comment on this original post and I will add you to the circle. I have to manually add you, so please be patient if you are unable to upload your photo yet. It may look like I live on G+, but I actually have a business to run – please excuse any delays wink :)

1) Add me +Catherine Hall and +Andrey Tochilin (of 500px) to your circle.
2) Add a comment to this original post (
3) After I add you to my Photographers’ Circle, go to
4) Click “Add photos.”
5) Caption your photo. Add your Google+ name before your description. See example.
+Catherine Hall: Eric Hudock on the Playa at Burning Man. Eric is my muse…
6) Share this post with your friends!

*See the official rules and details here*

What is your muse? Is it a person, a place or a thing? Let your imagination run wild!

We’re giving away three annual premium 500px Awesome accounts to 3 exceptional entries. The winning images will also be published on Catherine Hall Studios blog, Catherine Hall Studios Facebook Fan Page, Catherine Hall Studios Twitter Feed, and here on Google+!

The deadline for entries is August 28. Voting ends Sept 2.

Voters determine the People’s Choice Award and each “unique” comment counts as a vote. The qualifying entry with the most number of votes wins – so please share it with your friends :) Here’s what qualifies as “unique”:
1) Multiple comments on the same photograph by the same voter count as 1 vote.
2) Participants’ comments on their own entry do not qualify as votes.

Two other entries will receive honorable mentions. I will personally select two exceptional photographs based on their technique, composition, impact, creativity, visual appeal and effectiveness in conveying the theme.

Please contact +Andrey Tochilin or +Evgeny Tchebotarev for any questions or more information about

His Medusa-black hair is stained with thick playa dust – his piercing black-lined eyes rest intently in the direction of my lens. Even amid fire dancers, bare bodied beauties and thousands of bohemian Burning Man pilgrims, Eric Hudock cuts a striking outline against the stark landscape. Armed with my Canon 5DMII, I find myself invigorated by this close friend and muse, the subject of many of my fine art photographs. His striking features, complexity, and willingness to be vulnerable inspire my perpetual craving to explore the depth of human character.

Post has shared content

Post has shared content
wow. um. this seems pretty bad to me.
This one is going to be interesting.

So at this point we can all agree that internet access is a human right and situations like Egypt where access was cut off to the people to try and prevent protests are as wrong as it gets. It's easy when it's a government cutting off access to it's people everywhere. But what about this? BART cut off services on it's platforms. Is that the same thing? Is internet and phone access on public transit a right? What about all the public trains (like the ones we have here in LA) that get no service anywhere, are those violating our rights? Or is it just a right once it's been established, and then it's irrevocable? Or can an organization provide, or not, service to a specific area on their whim? No matter what direction this goes it's going to be interesting and have effects elsewhere.

Post has shared content
this could crush g+. no joke. get it together google! +Natalie Villalobos +Vic Gundotra
“Real Names” Policies Are an Abuse of Power

Everyone’s abuzz with the “nymwars,” mostly in response to Google Plus’ decision to enforce its “real names” policy. At first, Google Plus went on a deleting spree, killing off accounts that violated its policy. When the community reacted with outrage, Google Plus leaders tried to calm the anger by detailing their “new and improved” mechanism to enforce “real names” (without killing off accounts). This only sparked increased discussion about the value of pseudonymity. Dozens of blog posts have popped up with people expressing their support for pseudonymity and explaining their reasons. One of the posts, by Kirrily “Skud” Robert ( included a list of explanations that came from people she polled, including:

- “I am a high school teacher, privacy is of the utmost importance.”
- “I have used this name/account in a work context, my entire family know this name and my friends know this name. It enables me to participate online without being subject to harassment that at one point in time lead to my employer having to change their number so that calls could get through.”
- “I do not feel safe using my real name online as I have had people track me down from my online presence and had coworkers invade my private life.”
- “I’ve been stalked. I’m a rape survivor. I am a government employee that is prohibited from using my IRL.”
- “As a former victim of stalking that impacted my family I’ve used [my nickname] online for about 7 years.”
- “[this name] is a pseudonym I use to protect myself. My web site can be rather controversial and it has been used against me once.”
- “I started using [this name] to have at least a little layer of anonymity between me and people who act inappropriately/criminally. I think the “real names” policy hurts women in particular.
- “I enjoy being part of a global and open conversation, but I don’t wish for my opinions to offend conservative and religious people I know or am related to. Also I don’t want my husband’s Govt career impacted by his opinionated wife, or for his staff to feel in any way uncomfortable because of my views.”
- “I have privacy concerns for being stalked in the past. I’m not going to change my name for a google+ page. The price I might pay isn’t worth it.”
- “We get death threats at the blog, so while I’m not all that concerned with, you know, sane people finding me. I just don’t overly share information and use a pen name.”
- “This identity was used to protect my real identity as I am gay and my family live in a small village where if it were openly known that their son was gay they would have problems.”
- “I go by pseudonym for safety reasons. Being female, I am wary of internet harassment.”

You’ll notice a theme here…

Another site has popped up called “My Name Is Me” ( where people vocalize their support for pseudonyms. What’s most striking is the list of people who are affected by “real names” policies, including abuse survivors, activists, LGBT people, women, and young people.

Over and over again, people keep pointing to Facebook as an example where “real names” policies work. This makes me laugh hysterically. One of the things that became patently clear to me in my fieldwork is that countless teens who signed up to Facebook late into the game chose to use pseudonyms or nicknames. What’s even more noticeable in my data is that an extremely high percentage of people of color used pseudonyms as compared to the white teens that I interviewed. Of course, this would make sense…

The people who most heavily rely on pseudonyms in online spaces are those who are most marginalized by systems of power. “Real names” policies aren’t empowering; they’re an authoritarian assertion of power over vulnerable people. These ideas and issues aren’t new (and I’ve even talked about this before - ), but what is new is that marginalized people are banding together and speaking out loudly. And thank goodness.

What’s funny to me is that people also don’t seem to understand the history of Facebook’s “real names” culture. When early adopters (first the elite college students…) embraced Facebook, it was a trusted community. They gave the name that they used in the context of college or high school or the corporation that they were a part of. They used the name that fit into the network that they joined Facebook with. The names they used weren’t necessarily their legal names; plenty of people chose Bill instead of William. But they were, for all intents and purposes, “real.” As the site grew larger, people had to grapple with new crowds being present and discomfort emerged over the norms. But the norms were set and people kept signing up and giving the name that they were most commonly known by. By the time celebrities kicked in, Facebook wasn’t demanding that Lady Gaga call herself Stefani Germanotta, but of course, she had a “fan page” and was separate in the eyes of the crowd. Meanwhile, what many folks failed to notice is that countless black and Latino youth signed up to Facebook using handles. Most people don’t notice what black and Latino youth do online. Likewise, people from outside of the US started signing up to Facebook and using alternate names. Again, no one noticed because names transliterated from Arabic or Malaysian or containing phrases in Portuguese weren’t particularly visible to the real name enforcers. Real names are by no means universal on Facebook, but it’s the importance of real names is a myth that Facebook likes to shill out. And, for the most part, privileged white Americans use their real name on Facebook. So it “looks” right.

Then along comes Google Plus, thinking that it can just dictate a “real names” policy. Only, they made a huge mistake. They allowed the tech crowd to join within 48 hours of launching. The thing about the tech crowd is that it has a long history of nicks and handles and pseudonyms. And this crowd got to define the early social norms of the site, rather than being socialized into the norms set up by trusting college students who had joined a site that they thought was college-only. This was not a recipe for “real name” norm setting. Quite the opposite. Worse for Google… Tech folks are VERY happy to speak LOUDLY when they’re pissed off. So while countless black and Latino folks have been using nicks all over Facebook (just like they did on MySpace btw), they never loudly challenged Facebook’s policy. There was more of a “live and let live” approach to this. Not so lucky for Google and its name-bending community. Folks are now PISSED OFF.

Personally, I’m ecstatic to see this much outrage. And I’m really really glad to see seriously privileged people take up the issue, because while they are the least likely to actually be harmed by “real names” policies, they have the authority to be able to speak truth to power. And across the web, I’m seeing people highlight that this issue has more depth to it than fun names (and is a whole lot more complicated than boiling it down to being about anonymity, as Facebook’s Randi Zuckerberg foolishly did).

What’s at stake is people’s right to protect themselves, their right to actually maintain a form of control that gives them safety. If companies like Facebook and Google are actually committed to the safety of its users, they need to take these complaints seriously. Not everyone is safer by giving out their real name. Quite the opposite; many people are far LESS safe when they are identifiable. And those who are least safe are often those who are most vulnerable.

Likewise, the issue of reputation must be turned on its head when thinking about marginalized people. Folks point to the issue of people using pseudonyms to obscure their identity and, in theory, “protect” their reputation. The assumption baked into this is that the observer is qualified to actually assess someone’s reputation. All too often, and especially with marginalized people, the observer takes someone out of context and judges them inappropriately based on what they get online. Let me explain this in a concrete example that many of you have heard before. Years ago, I received a phone call from an Ivy League college admissions officer who wanted to accept a young black man from South Central in LA into their college; the student had written an application about how he wanted to leave behind the gang-ridden community he came from, but the admissions officers had found his MySpace which was filled with gang insignia. The question that was asked of me was “Why would he lie to us when we can tell the truth online?” Knowing that community, I was fairly certain that he was being honest with the college; he was also doing what it took to keep himself alive in his community. If he had used a pseudonym, the college wouldn’t have been able to get data out of context about him and inappropriately judge him. But they didn’t. They thought that their frame mattered most. I really hope that he got into that school.

There is no universal context, no matter how many times geeks want to tell you that you can be one person to everyone at every point. But just because people are doing what it takes to be appropriate in different contexts, to protect their safety, and to make certain that they are not judged out of context, doesn’t mean that everyone is a huckster. Rather, people are responsibly and reasonably responding to the structural conditions of these new media. And there’s nothing acceptable about those who are most privileged and powerful telling those who aren’t that it’s OK for their safety to be undermined. And you don’t guarantee safety by stopping people from using pseudonyms, but you do undermine people’s safety by doing so.

Thus, from my perspective, enforcing “real names” policies in online spaces is an abuse of power.

Originally posed at Apophenia:
Wait while more posts are being loaded