> My son only gets Calls, Messages, Maps, Camera (so we can video call, but I've ruthlessly turned off selfies), Photos, and Music. Nothing else.
I get that the internet is an addictive scary place with lots of content potentially dangerous to a young person.
But why would you care if your child took a selfie? That seems pretty draconian.
I'm speculating that it's not the selfie; it's where that selfie ends up (or with whom).
OP apparently still hasn't learned that the kids today are taking selfies "blind" using the rear camera.
My first phone that had a (rear) camera 20 years ago also had a chrome-plated mirror thing to help us take selfies. I guess nobody called them selfies then.
I guess point and shoot cameras also had those mirrors back then.
Glad to know that kids rediscovered camera selfies.
I do this myself (albeit pretty rarely) since the rear camera is significantly better than the front camera, especially in low light.
Your comment led me to the Insta360 device that makes it easy to take selfies with the main camera:
https://www.theverge.com/tech/907670/insta360-snap-usb-c-mag...
Second screen: provided by USB-C screencast and accessibility settings for to support touch. Image of device: https://platform.theverge.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/202...
Also, it doesn't add up. How would Camera let you video call? Don't you need Facetime?
Wait, not being able to make a picture of yourself is pretty draconian? In this case, the world before smartphones was a living Hell on Earth.
Fun fact: cameras have existed long before cellphones (let alone smart phones)
Its draconian not because selfies are a fundamental need, but because they seem harmless. Rules should be justifiable.
The bloody kid can take up some nice linen canvas, few sticks or charcoal, oil paint, turpentine and bloody paint his selfie! If it was good enough for Caravaggio, it is good enough for you!
[dead]