bsevenfour IMHO I think that you have misunderstood the differences between two very capable and in most respects equal systems; Airbus 320 / 30 / 40 and Boeing 777.
There is little new in restricting the pilot’s input to protect the aircraft structure – preventing overstressing. The earliest direct control aircraft had force limiting due to aerodynamic loads, since then with the advent of powered controls ‘Q’ pot and ‘g’ wt limiting have been used extensively. Similarly, computation is not new; I believe the aircraft as old as the Comet had a mechanically computed pitch gear change and several aircraft types had mechanical yaw dampers.
Thus on conventional aircraft, there is a point at which the crew cannot make any further effective control input; the system is in command. Differences between aircraft designs and individual pilot strength may in extreme circumstances lead to structural failure (certification oversight for rudder / fin limits), but the root cause of these failures usually resides with the crew who got themselves into such a bad position that unsafe practices were required for recovery. A bad position is my definition of being outside of the safe flight envelope.
The ‘disconnect’ is in people’s minds by not viewing the modern control systems in the wider context of safe flight. The Boeing / Airbus differences are in philosophy (cultural background) and some commercial bigotry. Boeing argues for a design philosophy that the crew always know better and must remain in control – do something at all cost (my gross simplification). Whereas Airbus accommodates crew error, yet does not remove the overall command and control from them (again my simplification). The analogy is to live in a wooden house, buy a fire extinguisher, and then train fire prevention and fire-fighting (Boeing); I would prefer to live in a fireproof house and teach the children not to play with matches (Airbus).
Your reference to Habsheim accident perpetuates the misunderstandings of the root causes; this is not to continue discussion on the accident in this thread, but as a clarification on your statement. If any aircraft makes a fly past at a power setting so that airspeed will decrease and if the crew do not add power the aircraft may stall or it will have to descend at constant (minimum) speed. If the crew fails to add power at low altitude, the aircraft is likely to crash whatever the control system design may be. If you play with matches even in a fireproof house you can get burnt.