Other interpretations require background information to rule out:
* NASA Stennis released NASA's first OSS.
* The first software released under an open source software anywhere has been released by NASA Stennis.
* NASA's Stennis facility has acquired AGI and its first act was an OSS release.
The last item can be ruled out by most folks since it "burys the lede" of a significant AGI development. The penultimate item can be ruled out by most people with an awareness of OSS. The first item is trickier without some knowledge of NASA as an organization and its history. For example, oftentimes things made by other organizations like JPL have a lot of NASA branding.In some ways, the "correct" interpretation also has reason to rule it out: What is newsworthy about a facility business unit of NASA doing something its first time that the rest of the organization has been doing for a while?
But thats wrong! HN users gets it all the time.
See?
First off, this was a different user. Second, they are simply saying that they didn't read the title that way either originally, not that they don't grasp what has been said since. Third, it is still a perfectly valid way to parse that sentence even using your attemped re-framing.
"Foo from HN releases X" could perfectly reasonably be parsed to mean that X is coming from HN or from Foo. I left out the word "user" because that is an element you added that is not in the original title. "Stennis" is not a mere individual user with no actual relationship to NASA. The title doesn't contain enough information to indicate if Stennis is merely the agent or venue or department through which NASA released something, or is being referred to as it's own distinct entity releasing something of it's own, where "NASA" is merely something like the country it happens to live in. All that level of detail comes from the article or from just happening to already have prior general knowledge of NASA and it's sub-organizitions.