For one, the problem description says the straight line is “along the Earth’s surface” so I don’t think you can reasonably think it might go into space.
And to me it seems reasonable to say a straight line means not turning. I personally imagined getting in a plane and going straight forward, assuming there is no wind to blow me off course.
That is just the common understanding of straight. If somebody asks you to walk in a straight line, do you ask them what coordinate system they’re using? No, you walk forward without turning.
I guess “most obvious” can always be up to interpretation, though.
I don't disagree that it is possible to deduce the great circle if you think about it and have the knowledge to coordinate systems. But why even ask the question this way when you can get to the core of the question by explicitly asking "Along the great circle that reaches its max latitude at Seattle, what's the next country it touches going eastward from Seattle?" This would yield many more correct answers and why people think its mostly wordplay (because it is).
Even so, my guess after a very brief thought about it was actually Canada, so this understanding didn’t help me any :)
I had never heard of this concept of “great circles” before, so it personally wouldn’t have made it clearer to me without some research.
Given my ignorance on this topic, I found the fact that Australia was the first country you’d hit to be really quite remarkable.
Well, you've already run into a problem, because any line that follows the Earth's surface can't possibly be straight.
Actually it's Canada, if "walk East" means "walk eastward along a line of constant latitude".