Cryptocurrency development often runs at different times than token markets and is quieter and slower, but equally revealing. This is the obvious conclusion from a short but thought-provoking tweet posted by CryptoDep this week, which shared a snapshot of Santiment sources titled “Top AI and Big Data Projects by Developer Activity (30 Days).” This dataset examines public GitHub events, commits, pull requests, issues, and other visible activity across projects at the intersection of blockchain, AI, and big data.
At first glance, the numbers are striking. $ICP It has a 30-day development activity score of 237, which is better than other products. The difference between that number and the next entry will be immediately apparent. Filecoin recorded 36.3, Livepeer 31.2 and The Graph 24.4. Further down the list are projects that blend AI and distributed computing. Bittensor is 18.1; $cubic 17.8 and 17.5 on Oasis Network. FLUX is at 16.4, while Swarms and Virtuals Protocol round out the 10 at 8.63 and 8.13 respectively. Santiment is credited as the data source.
Numbers like these don’t tell the whole story, but they can serve as a useful compass. Public activity on GitHub is a blunt weapon. Personal work, research notes, and contributions made outside the platform will be missed, but when we see spikes or large gaps, they usually indicate something tangible, like a major upgrade, developers sprinting to fix bugs, or an influx of new contributors.
AI blockchain development competition
in $ICPa score of 237 screams “something is going on” in the public repository. That could mean a set of protocol improvements, new SDKs or tools, or simply a coordinated push from the community to advance functionality. It makes intuitive sense that Filecoin and Livepeer would finish near the top.
Both projects focus on infrastructure. Filecoin handles decentralized storage, while Livepeer focuses on video streaming infrastructure. These spaces require continuous iteration to improve reliability and developer ergonomics. The strong results in the graph are also in line with expectations, and the index network requires regular maintenance to support the growing web of distributed apps and data queries.
The mid-pack entry is interesting because it represents a project that seeks to mash up an AI-style model with a decentralized computing marketplace. Networks like Bittensor, $cubic FLUX and FLUX are prototypes of an emerging category. Consider a marketplace for compute, data, or model training that is not managed by a single cloud provider.
Although it has not yet generated the kind of public activity seen with large infrastructure projects, it has shown steady developer momentum. This may simply reflect smaller teams, more private experimentation, or development that is not reflected in a single public repository. If a project like Swarm or Virtuals has a low score, it should not be considered a failure.
Lower numbers often mean quieter, more intensive development cycles, such as smart contract audits, private testnets, or foundation work that doesn’t show up as frequent GitHub events. The ratio between visible commitment and meaningful progress is not necessarily linear. Developer activity is useful input for many people: people looking at the space, engineers considering which stack to learn, or investors trying to separate substance from hype.
This is not a price prediction, but it does help you see where engineering energy is being focused. This snapshot of CryptoDep using Santiment metrics is a reminder that the most interesting action in cryptocurrencies often happens in code, not exchanges. Keep an eye on these repositories. As development accelerates, feature releases and ecosystem growth often follow.
