The whole point of the article is that ambiguity in interpretation is to be celebrated, which is precisely what we see in the title. The title is an accurate reflection of the content of the essay in this regard.
That people are so hung up on interpretation, on meaning, is no more than habit.
Better to revel in uncertainty.
The purpose of HN's policy in regard to article titles is that ambiguity in the interpretation of titles creates noise which needs to be removed from the signal of comment quality. Many users simply reply to their initial interpretation of a title, and boring/non-clever titles act as a filter against people unwilling to make even the minimal effort of reading the article first by removing that low-hanging fruit. Ambiguity in interpretation may be a wonderful thing in literature, but on the internet and sites like this it can be cancerous.
I half-wish HN would replace titles with random hashes, at least for a limited time or for low-karma accounts, in order to force people to have to RTFA to comment. Although then, most comments would just be complaints about that.
