Two (three) areas that they (MS) refuse to consider:
1. Geo-blocking. Attacks against my server come from three primary countries; why can I block those countries (easily)?
(Hand in had with this: Block all VIP (rogue) servers. The list those is growing too)
2. If "someone" tries 60 log in attempts in 50 seconds; there is a good chance "they" are not a person; block them.

Does anyone look at their {server/client} access log files anymore? I see the same brute force attacks against my server multiple times every day. Why not -- when the first one (hack) attempts; block that IP from accessing my server (ever) again? When common methods of attack are attempted; when the first one of 20-50 different attacks are tried; block all of the rest. Share that blocked IP with everyone else so everyone will know that address is a bad actor (or open server/client) - that needs to be 'fixed'.

... a LOT of tabs open on my computers.

One of the real features Google / chrome need to add: "don't sleep this tab" (usually for email, but others too)....

A key problem {bug} with a lot of tabs open: loss of internet (with browsers). Not just 'timeout' ... but the entire browsers for that type (Chrome or Edge); all of them will lose connection with the internet. (I can still use non-browsers to access network functions, so I know it isn't a 'system' error). Wish they would add this to the fixed list before they add new features that are not as/that important.

I've fired up a Win 10 VM ("you might be a victim of counterfeiting") -- and I was able to get it (Office / Outlook.exe 2016) working there (30 days). I've ordered parts to make that VM Host system redundant (fedex is so slow!); however I can look into finding alternate sources of MS Office Pro, that is not a 30 days expiration. I (was) kind of thinking: reset the VM every 30 days.

The good (?) news is that the pop3 / IMAP settings are visible (again); and can be accessed/enabled, so that opens the door to other (non-office) options.

Trivia:
OfficeSuite - cuts off key features at the knee; and appears to only download headers unless you get the ... subscription model.
Pegasus can now be attempted (ref: access to pop3)

Thank you for the info!

I actually saw this; and their advertising concerned me about the true 'will this work' question. I'll work to see if I can get it installed (Keeping in mind that M$ has disabled the ability to see and change POP3 settings).

I've tried to install it {2013}; No joy. I've tried to install 2016 {and 2013) onto a clean VM (Win 7); No joy (see error message). There might be an issue of: on the primary - with office (professional) 2010 installed (and many other office programs); they (all office apps) would need to be "uninstalled" before installing them (not an option).

I will try / look at some other suggestions. Back to: M$ has blocked access to the ability to "enable" (or look at) pop3 connection.

For me there is a level of irony; in that AT&T is/has dropping support for 3G; I'm now required to get a 'newer' phone. I know that it will not be 'new'; for this (and related) reasons.

To your point: Getting Apple to (ever) to the right thing is and has been painful. 'Auto correcting' photo's has been an issue since the 35mm days (TLDR: there were some really interesting cloud formations around me; so I stopped to take photo's; and they wouldn't fit in one shot. When they were developed - the auto-correction for the clouds tweaked in two different ways; and they each looked like a different location; and I've never been able to get the two photo's back together). How (that story) relates: there was no 'off switch'; there is no 'off switch' - and Apple will likely not give the user that capability.

Relating to this: Currently when I attempt to take an image/photo of a sunset/sun rise; the image has consistently been washed out (with modern phone / cameras). Without spending (how much for a new iPhone?) just to find out ... the images are now going to be worse; my level of trust has going down further with Apple. And before it is suggested that I buy a 'professional' camera; again ... how much does it cost for this 'phone' ?

By reading the Apple support article for ProRAW -- being the request for removal of the odd photo editing is not addressed by disabling this feature. And worse: "ProRAW files are 10 to 12 times larger than HEIF or JPEG files. If you store the files on your device, you might run out of space more quickly than you expect. And if you use iCloud Photos to store your photos, you might need to upgrade your iCloud storage plan to make more space available for these larger files."

Actually - you (et al) are in error here. Though fox is propaganda (not news); they have censored their information to reflect one sided bias. Worse; they call them selves 'news'. We might differ in the end definition (propaganda vs censorship) the bottom line: one side does not get a fair voice. There was an (old now) interview where Obama was being asked a series of questions; about voting (irony). His response indicated that anyone should be able to vote; and paused. fox cut it as that point ... and you could see all of they people's chin hit the floor; he wanted illegal votes. HOWEVER if you looked up the entire interview; the realized that his statement might be misinterpreted; and after the pause added the line (in-context) for those with a legal right to vote. This is where I started watching fox with a critical eye; and after a few more such bias reporting ... stopped watching it.

Actually; there are other broadcasts that are censored too (not just 'over the air waves'); you have narrowed scope to meet your (bad) criteria and (worse) response. And in all instances; it is still censorship.

I always find it amusing when people agree with me ... then try to disagree.

WAY OUT OF CONTEXT. Boy did you miss the boat!

Yep... given the total off the wall non-answer to anything raised; yep - irony is thick here.

1. Point missed (big time); and ... you claim that they don't have an 'on-line presence' that people can respond to?
fox twitter
... and if you look at the end of almost every fox news article.
(Note and irony: Section 230 doesn't apply)
2. Perhaps you should look at what fox is publishing before defend them so quickly.
Example: Tucker: Jan. 6 was not a terrorist attack
Two search engines (duck & google) could not find one instance to support your theory; and quite the opposite is true: fox News During the Jan. 6 Riots Was Even Worse Than You Remember

You (et al) are enjoying revisionist history; and defending an undefinable action; and avoiding the key issues. My question to you: Rather than defending fox; why don't you call them out? On the 1/6 anniversary -- what did they broadcast?
Why don't you call them out for their duplicity for Covid?
I could go on; but your failures are noted.

You are asking 'if censorship is justified'. You are asking the wrong question. Look back at 'mass media'; why is it that fox refuses to broadcast anything negative about conservatives/republicans? Is that censorship? Why is it that all of them (fox/ABC/NBC/CBS) refuses to broadcast nudity, swearing, gross violence? Is that censorship? Where is the outcry here?

The real question: Why is 'censorship' necessary? Why are people so stupid; willing to believe anything that is fed to them? Why is it that FB (that is what this is really about) does not have a moderator system (like /.) so such items are not weeded out & flagged? Why is it that people are so willing to believe these nut job conspiracy theories? Hey, I like to hear a good yarn, but that doesn't mean that it is true. Star Trek didn't happen, Star Wars didn't happen; and I shouldn't storm the castle because a man that has lied (what is the count ... more than 30,000 times?) says another 'big lie'. People are wrapping them selves into isolation of falsehood - and it is killing them. It is not censorship to expose the lies for what they are, and attempt to stop them.

There is more to life than vaccine issues. That is just the start of their (DDG) issues; all be it life critical (that is DDG will push fake info & disproved theory more than a proper response to the disproved theory). An example for what I see all the time: looking for actor "a"; who had a role in Star Trek; returns actor "b" and Star Trek; with out actor "a".

DDG search - will frequently not return the results/type of results I'm looking for (usually it's results are not useful); so I'm forced to use Google. It would be nice if DDG would have a "our results suck; here is a click for a google result" button. (Bing just sucks; and never returns anything of value)

I have a website - and cannot submit it to DDG (I have had the website longer than DDG has existed); and it cannot be found with DDG. DDG search results also has a heavily right wing --- conspiracy bias. And opening a video results in a new tab: broken. Click on the wrong part of the DDG search results for a video: broken. Ability to remove results (negate) - broken.

And for all search engines:
Lack of ability to persistently remove URL's that I don't want: non-existent.
Ability to rate the results for a search: non-existent.
Clearly indicate advertisement from search results: needs a lot of work.

Looking for a search engine - in all the wrong places.

I'm not sure if you are supporting my point; or that you know nothing about what was being said. The discussion was that somehow, twitter was blocking freedom of speech (no, it's not); and as you pointed out; there can be civil actions based on ones 'speech' if it is not appropriate.

Well - in the initial article; you can see that there is a civil response for bad actions; much like the example of yelling "fire" in the theater; as you (and I) have pointed out.

There are many ways to get banned form multiple social media accounts. Take -- FB and sex offenders. FB's blanket policy banning sex offenders; is that blocking free speech? (Why/why not)

Where do you draw the line? Here; especially Jan 6; people were killed; on both sides. Where was the call to "don't attack"; "don't hurt anyone" ... or especially the call "don't kill anyone" ???

Freedom of speech has it's limitations. Clearly - the SCOTUS has stated that you can't yell "fire" in a theater - if there is no fire. More to the point there; he still has a platform. He can (and unfortunately does) get his message out. He has violated terms of service; he has incited violence (many, many times). How many times can anyone violate terms of service ( resulting in another's death ) before they not allowed to use that service, permanently ?