Wow... I'm just baffled and amazed that it can be interpreted that way. LOL There's nothing wrong with the message, thus nothing needs to be corrected.
I'm baffled that there are so many people who don't understand basic English and believe that it's correctly worded.
Let's look at it a bit differently. I have a bag of apples and I give
you one apple to eat and tell you that you have one "apple remaining".
Why would anyone think that that means there are zero apples left in the
bag to eat and not that there is still one apple left?
Saying that you have a "time out" implies that you can allow the shot clock to expire without penalty as you have a time out to use to get one extension of that shot clock. (and this is what actually happens when you use your first time out)
You are then told you have "one time out remaining". Why would anyone think that the time out they have remaining would be different from the first one? If the first "time out" resulted in a shot clock extension it is only logical to assume that the second "time out" would also result in the same action. Back to the apples analogy ... If I said I had a bag with two apples and I give you one, then tell you there is one remaining, would you not be surprised when you came back for the second apple and I pulled out a banana?
If you were in fact told that you have "No timeouts remaining" that would imply that you cannot allow the shot clock to expire as you do not have a time out to extended it and will therefore be disqualified.
This argument ultimately boils down to basic English grammar and while yes, most veteran players understand that they can extend the clock once and on the second instance will be DQ'd that is only based on experience and not because the wording used in the game is correct.