Although vague concerns aren't themselves actionable, the actions that could be recommended in both cases would be research. To look into whether "too many computers" is actually causal and what might be done about that. My guess is "No" but if the investigators thought we need to check that's what they'd recommend.

But most often what's needed is smarter machines, not less of them.

Inadequate engine performance during take off is a periodic cause of problems. Research was done into whether airports could add markers so that pilots could tell if their acceleration was less than expected. That went nowhere because humans don't have an accurate sense of acceleration or time passing. Today new Airbus jets integrate their position over time and will warn audibly "Check acceleration" if underperforming, long before V1 (maximum abort speed). Meanwhile a common underlying cause of inadequate performance is entering incorrect air temperature, modern Boeings will delete input temperatures that don't resemble the measured temperature at an air intake when the engines switch on. Pilots must enter a plausible temperature and try again, or perform a fully manual take off. So investigators now might recommend one or both of these countermeasures be adopted, or that the research be done again knowing these options exist.