You appear to be making a straw man argument that the planes are safe by claiming to refute the 'sudden-unavoidable-death machines' argument which no one is making.
The probability of a total loss of an aircraft is basically proportional to either its flight hours or number of takeoffs and landings (which are (handwave) correlated (unless you are Aloha Airlines)). A fleet of thousands of planes (especially a 'mature' design), flying thousands of hours per year, in service for decades should have very few losses due to fundamental design issues. It would be nice to say it should be Assuming nothing else changed, at full fleet size, that would be over 30 losses a year, or well over 1000 losses over the fleet's lifetime. They misengineered the system by at least 3 orders of magnitude. This is, at the very least, profound professional and managerial negligence. I'm not not yet convinced it's not also criminal. At the very least, all management who touched this subsystem or were part of the no-new-training-at-any-cost push should have already been shown the door up to and including the CEO.
And yes, things _are_ being done and they are adding 'nines' to the reliability as quickly as they can, but again, they are starting from a subsystem that kills everybody on board every 800,000 flight hours or so.
They appear to be dishonest with the public (and perhaps themselves) about how much risk is eliminated with each change and, similarly, appear to not be factoring in that some of these changes introduce other risks and failure modes.
What we have here is a giant fucking mess and a management organization that fosters no confidence in its ability to navigate itself out of it. In the end, I do expect Boeing to somehow glue-gun 3 more 9's of reliability onto this airframe and stop bleeding valuation, but it won't be pretty and it probably won't be fast.