It's like no matter what you have to fight the intentions of the maker to get what you want.

On ubuntu you have to expunge snapd and now that ubuntu pro nagger, where in both cases they went out of their way to make these dofficult to remove by making half the os depend on them but only artificially through package manager declarations, nothing really depends on them. You can still get them out, but you're fighting the will of the supplier which did not go away. They or something else will always come back and need to be faught again.

On redhat it's less about the architecture of the distro and more about the company since beingvsold to ibm. destroying centos shows that they really do not want a centos to exist. centos-alikes have sprung up to replace it, but ibm's wishes did not go away, and so as soon as they can figure out a way to, they will make a centos (alma, rocky) users life a pain again.

I'm starting to think the answer to finding a distro that has no interest in controlling you and getting something out of you inwillingly is actually arch. Maybe nix but the indirection seems like the old programmer joke about the overengineered hello world. But they don't seem to be doing their annnoying weird thing to get anything out of you at least, more a genuine engineering experiment.