Too many people inferring what happened from limited, low accuracy information and from unsubstantiated references.
The key to understanding why this accident occurred, which may provide value to future safety, is by considering a range of possibilities (irrespective of any official report), starting from a view that the crew were trying to do a good job.
They did not set out to kill themselves.
The departure fuel load may have been insufficient for the plan, but there was probably an unrecorded plan to make an en-route tech stop to refuel. What aspects could have affected the decisions related to this.
Was the departure fuel as stated, were the indications correct, were there gauge errors or MEL items, or possible fungal fuel contamination which can give erratic fuel indications.
If the en-route refuel option was rejected then what influenced the decision; fuel gauging issues as above or mistaken use of of the fuel planning page on the GNS. Who made the decision, were they aware of the pitfalls of the planning page or gauging inaccuracies.
If the decision was made to press on, then why no change of plan when a preceding aircraft required priority and the crew were requested to hold.
The easy view in hindsight is to blame the crew, but the balancing view is that the crew may have believed that the fuel state was sufficient; if so, why.