Userland (whether GNU or alternatives) is vulnerable to the same pressures. The only thing unique about the Linux kernel is that it is indespensible (hence the existential dread). A lot of major projects have already embraced the same LLM-driven development process as Linux (though it is particularly egregious in Linux). Aside from the kernel, the task of putting together a slop-free distribution today is very challenging (nothing like this exists, except for some highly experimental and incomplete projects like Hyperbola). It requires the sacrifice of a lot of tools which we have grown accustomed to. It is something like a regression to the state of free software computing 20 years ago.

The same problem applies to the BSDs, because even if the base system is clean (say, if NetBSD maintains the status quo, or embraces an explicit no AI policy going forward), people rely on ports (packages) to do anything serious with their computers, which are the same programs people run on Linux. Your web browsers, text editors, window managers, word processors, password managers, graphic design tools, etc. Also a lot of plumbing falls into this category, like system libraries, image/video/audio codecs, programming languages, build systems, databases, webservers, middleware, etc.

You can have your perfectly slop-free operating system with new drivers to leverage the latest hardware, but you're still stuck with no alternative to Firefox.