If Reddit required face scans to prove you’re human… would you still use it?
With AI bots getting harder to detect, there’s been growing discussion around platforms using biometric verification (like face scans) to confirm real users.
Cool in theory... Reddit is full of bots, fake accounts and garbage engagement. But let’s be real…
Reddit without anonymity isn’t Reddit.
The whole point of this platform is:
Saying things you wouldn’t say elsewhere
Being anonymous without consequences tied to your real identity
Having raw, unfiltered discussions
And now the proposed solution is… scan your face?
But what's the guarantee tech companies not to store or misuse biometric data.
Even if they promise they won’t store it:
No one believes that
Data leaks happen all the time
And once that line is crossed, there’s no going back
On one side, identity verification could:
Reduce bots and fake accounts
Improve trust in conversations
Clean up spam-heavy communities
On the other hand, Reddit has always been built on anonymity, and changes like this could shift how people use the platform entirely.
There are also alternative ideas being floated:
Zero-knowledge proof verification
Device-based authentication
Temporary “human verification” tokens
Two questions for the PH community here:
If you use Reddit, what would you want: fewer bots or actual anonymity?
Should Product Hunt apply the same verification to find and delete bots or fake accounts?
P.S. I am currently working on a pilot with Reddit's ex-CTO to test identity verification on my subreddit. I will check the sentiment of the community at my subreddit r/GrowthHacking and report back here.
Replies
Apparent for Gmail
I don't think I would be opposed to the idea of that level of validation, ideally one-time, but I would care A LOT about who is actually doing the validation, how it's handled, etc.
Agen
@daniel_dorne Maybe that's what happens when the social platforms want to become governments of the world virtually :D
Agen
ClawSecure
@rohanrecommends This is the exact same tension we deal with in the AI agent ecosystem. How do you verify identity without destroying the openness that makes the system valuable?
The biometric approach feels like using a sledgehammer for a scalpel problem. You don't need to know WHO someone is to verify they're real. Zero-knowledge proofs and device-based authentication are much better architectures because they answer the question "is this a real human?" without answering "which human?"
We work on identity verification for AI agents and the principle is the same. You need to know that an agent is legitimate and its code is safe without necessarily exposing every detail about who built it. The verification layer should confirm trust without requiring full transparency on identity. That's the balance.
The Reddit problem is also a spectrum. Not every subreddit needs the same level of verification. High-stakes communities (finance, medical, legal) might benefit from stronger verification. Casual discussion communities would die overnight if anonymity disappeared. A tiered approach where communities opt into different verification levels makes more sense than a platform-wide mandate.
To your questions: fewer bots AND anonymity shouldn't be mutually exclusive. The right cryptographic tools can give you both. And for PH, the Kitty Coins leaderboard is actually a decent organic signal for separating real contributors from bots without touching biometric data. Contribution-based reputation is a lighter-weight trust layer that preserves privacy.
Interested to hear what comes out of the Reddit pilot. That data will be valuable for every platform thinking about this.
@jdsalbego Your point about verifying humanness without knowing who the human is really captures the core design challenge.
I also like the idea of a tiered model where high‑stakes communities opt into stronger verification while casual subs stay anonymous, that feels much closer to Reddit’s DNA.
And totally agree: contribution-based reputation (like Kitty Coins here) is such an underrated, privacy‑respecting trust layer.
Thanks for such a thoughtful, systems‑level take, will definitely feed this into the pilot learnings.
ClawSecure
@rohanrecommends Glad it resonated. The tiered model is really the key insight. Applying one verification standard across an entire platform is the same mistake we see in agent security: treating every skill and every context with the same risk profile. A financial trading agent needs different verification than a weather lookup tool. Same principle applies to communities.
Would genuinely love to see the pilot data when it's ready. The balance between trust and privacy is going to be one of the defining design challenges across every platform, social networks, agent ecosystems, marketplaces, all of it. The teams solving it with cryptographic tools instead of surveillance will win long-term.
Good luck with the pilot, keep us posted.
@jdsalbego Thanks J.D. :) you're the security expert so I value your commentary.
ClawSecure
@rohanrecommends My pleasure!
minimalist phone: creating folders
Probably yes, my photos are anyway everywhere. And from my own experience, when I still faced bans because of being a bot, I would welcome this to remove other bots from the platform – to make it authentic.
@busmark_w_nika I second you, hence I am running a pilot with the ex-CTO of Reddit to test if redditors welcome identity verification or fight it.
Should Product Hunt apply the same verification to find and delete bots or fake accounts? What do you think?
minimalist phone: creating folders
@rohanrecommends I said this aloud 1 year ago when there were bots that I gladly provide my photo or ID card just to have more clear space (because I used to have like 10 bot comments under one post) :D
@busmark_w_nika I think I would be up for it as well. :)
Reddit doesn’t need my face, it needs better bot detection. Happy to prove I’m human, not volunteering my biometrics for the next data leak headline.
@imharikumaran This is such a sharp way to put it: Reddit doesn’t need your face, it needs better bot detection. Thanks for stopping by to share your thoughts, Hari :)
Great question, and I think it touches on a fundamental tension in how we build online communities.
As a developer, I'd lean heavily toward zero-knowledge proof verification or device-based authentication over biometric scans. The reason is simple: you can solve the bot problem without creating a new, arguably worse problem , a centralized biometric database that becomes a honeypot for attackers.
Face scans feel like using a sledgehammer to fix a leaky faucet. The real issue isn't identity , it's proof of humanness. Those are two very different things. You don't need to know WHO someone is to confirm they're not a bot.
Reddit's value has always been in the quality of ideas, not the identity behind them. Some of the best technical advice I've ever gotten came from throwaway accounts. Kill anonymity, and you kill that dynamic.
For Product Hunt specifically , I think lightweight verification (like email + device fingerprinting + behavioral signals) would go a long way without crossing into biometric territory. Bots have patterns that are detectable without ever scanning a face.
Curious to hear what comes out of the pilot with your subreddit. That's a bold experiment.
@abdullah_mohamed14 Love this breakdown – especially the line that the real problem is proof of humanness, not identity.
Your argument against creating a biometric honeypot is spot on, and zero‑knowledge proofs/device fingerprints feel like a much saner direction.
I also agree that some of the best content on Reddit has historically come from throwaway accounts; losing that would fundamentally change the culture. And your suggestion for Product Hunt – lightweight verification + behavioral signals instead of biometrics – is a very pragmatic middle ground.
Really appreciate such a thoughtful, developer‑level perspective on this, Abdullah. :)
@rohanrecommends
Yeah the honeypot angle is what worries me most. We've seen enough data breaches to know that "we won't store it" means nothing once the infrastructure exists. The incentive to collect always wins eventually.
Interested to see how the subreddit pilot goes. Real data from an actual community would settle a lot of the theoretical back and forth around this. If behavioral signals alone catch most bots without touching identity at all, that's a pretty strong argument against going the biometric route.
@abdullah_mohamed14 I share your skepticism on “we won’t store it” promises; history hasn’t been kind to those assurances.
Thanks for taking the time to dig into the nuance here, it helps shape how we design the experiment. :)
@rohanrecommends
For sure. And honestly, the experiment itself is valuable regardless of the outcome. Even if biometric verification "works" technically, knowing whether users accept it or just leave is the real question. Adoption data beats opinion polls every time.
Everyone has bad experiences - Reddit is a place where angry old mods shut you down and threaten to ban your account. To me Reddit is like my old AMC Hornet, wanting to be a Tesla. All they did was add a fresh coat of paint and AI copilot in the back seat.
The IPO was Reddit walking into a Tesla dealership saying "value me like a tech company." Wall Street bought it but it's still a Hornet running on volunteer labor, tribal knowledge, and a constant threat from those angry mods and AI.
Wall Street bought their story, and now they're scrambling for new income streams. It feels they're lining as another control node for users.
@robert_vassov The point about new income streams morphing into new control nodes is also a real concern, especially when identity and biometrics get involved. Thanks for bringing a bit of storytelling and humor into an otherwise heavy topic. :D
ArkTabs
Question: If you use Reddit, what would you want: fewer bots or actual anonymity?
Answer: I want my legit posts on reddit not to be filtered automatically.
@nabeelalihashmi This is such an underrated frustration before we even get to fewer bots vs anonymity, many people just want their legitimate posts not to get auto‑filtered into oblivion. It has sometimes happened to me too.
ArkTabs
@rohanrecommends Face scanning won't make Reddit better at all. Main problem is that Reddit's ears and brains are blocked and filled with arrogance.
Face scans = hard no. Even if they say it’s not stored , trust is already too low for that promise to mean anything.
@alheri_murya Your comment sums up how a lot of people feel right now. Even if the tech is “safe on paper,” you’re right that trust is already so low that most users just won’t buy the promise of “we don’t store it.”
Really appreciate you stating that boundary so clearly, platforms need to hear this side just as loudly as the pro‑verification arguments.
ConnectMachine
Product Hunt can use the same system, however, I am not sure how many users would opt for it and it feels current verification system is catching up.
@syed_shayanur_rahman Thanks for adding your balanced perspective. :)