The Washington Post has released a new article discussing the woes of the FBI due to the rise in use of end-to-end encryption and anonymous zero knowledge network services.
In the article, the FBI complains that their lack of surveillance capability is interfering with their ability to arbitrarily wiretap targets on new services that are not required by law to have wiretap capabilities built into them. They complain that "hundreds" of investigations have been "interfered with" because wiretap orders were not followed through with.
This is a poor argument to come to the table with. They want to violate the security and privacy of everyone on earth in order to secure extra evidence in "hundreds" of investigations. They even play the child pornography card to try to trump up an emotional response, as if allowing them to surveil the entire planet would end child pornography, or if someone is opposed to total surveillance, they are in favor of the exploitation of children. It is a weak ploy for a group that has no real argument in favor of their position.
The FBI has extensive resources at its disposal to go after criminals, yet they want more. You have to ask yourself what amount of intrusion into your life is reasonable. They already look at your bank records. They already take video of you in public places. They already track your license plates. How much is too much? Should we all install cameras in our own homes and require them to be on at all times so we can be sure we aren't doing anything the state doesn't approve of? Surely anyone that would oppose that supports organized crime.
Make no mistake, total surveillance of the internet and all communications is the exploitation of your privacy.