As a low hours private pilot I found the Vanity Fair article to be a good account of events with reasonable inferrences drawn to cover the gaps in the official reports. As a Systems Analyst, I personally believe that the side stick control systems used by Airbus were the major contributory factor to this incident.
Side stick controllers are fine in single pilot military aircraft where weight, space constraints and the ability of the pilot to maintain control inputs under high G forces are paramount. They have no place in multi-pilot commercial aircraft unless physically linked so that each pilot is aware of conflicting inputs.
Fly by wire controls have improved aircraft safety, but by allowing aircraft to be flown using a sidestick control safety has been reduced by removing the physical and visual cues given by linked conventional control columns. Had this aircraft been fitted with such controls, it would have been immediately obvious that the control column was being held back and that exaggerated flight control inputs were being made. The situation would have been recognised at an earlier stage.
Clearly it is impossible for Airbus to modify their cockpit design to incorporate dual conventional control columns, but surely a means could be devised to ensure that each pilots control sidestick mirrors the position of the other. The force feedback mechanisms of PC joystick controllers could be a good starting point.
I personally dislike side stick controls to the extent that I have made it a point to never fly on a commercial aircraft that uses them. Fly by wire is fine, just so long as the cockpit looks "normal"!
The current practice of flying aircraft at the edge of the performance envelope in order to minimise fuel use and maximise profit can only lead to more of these upsets in the future, although most will be resolved with a less tragic outcome.