Atheism: An excuse to ignore the reality that it's not all about you.

If you're a true Atheist, and don't actually give a shit about religion, then this post is not about you. However, if you're a selfist...

I'd like to introduce you to a species of human: the Idiot (homo ignoramus). Now, the Idiot is quite an inflexible creature, unable to cope with certain things. If the Idiot asks you for something, and you don't want to give it, my advice is to only say "yes" only if you're very desperate for a "friend". Saying "no" to the Idiot results in the same question being asked again. And again. So you say to them, "No means no." And they ask again.

Sometimes they'll come up with words like "pretty please" and, most dominant, "I'll be your friend." This is called the friendly Idiot (homo ignoramus prettipleasus), often a fan of the guilt trip.

Other times, they won't even ask, instead they'll say something like "give it here you fucking retard." Often they won't request anything. They'll call you anything listed in the Idiot manual; as for anything else, they won't bother. This is called the stupid Idiot (homo ignoramus retardus). The best antidote for these is to imagine them writing "your a retard", or "your gae" (something I actually have seen written somewhere - if you've been in D11 at my school, you would probably have seen this one).

Then there's the ones who think they're cool. They're the crowd Idiots (homo ignoramus imgunnasmashyoubro-us). If you correct them, they'll say something like the following: "what? what? you wanna fight? i'll smash you, cunt." If you end up grabbing their arm and being like an assertively-speaking brick wall instead, then this type of Idiot can be quite amusing.

I may have not covered all types of the humble* Idiot. But they have this one thing in common: nothing seems to get into their head, unless, of course, it's all about them, or puts them in the spotlight. That, my dear friend**, is what an Idiot is all about.

* Which of course is bullshit. This is the problem with this writing style. Some idioms really suck.
** This could also be bullshit. You have been warned.

So, there's a nice introduction to the Idiot.

Now, if you are an Idiot, and also an Atheist, then this post is definitely about you. Yes, you are in the spotlight. I have several tins of tomatoes here, and depending on the way you act, I may or may not open them beforehand. Yes, there are Idiots out there who are also Christians, but someone should be able to set them straight, and then they might actually follow the book.

If you're not an Idiot, but an Atheist nonetheless, then this post is still about you, but I'll refrain from using those tomatoes.

I have several arguments I want to attack. Let's make a list, shall we?

1. "There is no God. There just isn't."
You suck. You just do.

2. "There is no God, because Darwin said so."
Or anyone else. Oddly enough, in his later years, Darwin became an Agnostic. Unfortunately, he was an anything-but-Christianity Agnostic. That probably gives away his intention: to write some gibberish just to counteract Christianity. Kinda like this guy...

3. "There is no God, because Richard Dawkins said so."
The problem behind your reasoning is simple: Richard Dawkins is full of shit. In his TV special, "The root of all evil?", he attempted to link the Islamic terrorists behind the London bombings with Christianity, which is something you don't do. Why? Because Christianity and Islam are different religions. Forget what they say about Allah being the Christian god; it's just a scam. The Christian god's name is Yahweh.

Here's a much more complete article on the matter, and I will quote from it:
"[H]ow does this 'intellectual laziness' come across on TV? It is seen in the large number of unsubstantiated allegations that he made in both segments, which must have had the more-honest atheist evolutionists cringing with embarrassment." I personally have not seen this show, and by the look of it, I personally don't want to waste 90 minutes of my life watching it.

Heck, even Wikipedia makes him look stupid. "Dawkins rounds off this episode with a presentation of Bertrand Russell's celestial teapot analogy. He argues that just because science has not yet answered every conceivable question about the universe, there is no need to turn to faith, which has never answered anything of significance."

How the fuck do you know that it has never answered anything of significance? You don't fucking know.

4. "The Bible is full of contradictions!"
A lot of the ones with an unobvious answer have been debunked. Have a look at this. While some appear to hold water, some certainly don't. For example, "The bat is not a bird." Hang on - aren't you looking for contradictions within the Bible, and not your personal beliefs? Also, some aren't contradictions at all:

What was Jesus' prediction regarding Peter's denial?

• Before the cock crow - MAT 26:34
• Before the cock crow twice - MAR 14:30

It's an elaboration. Get your fucking facts right.

And the author of this list has some responses for people "correcting" him. I am going to say something for every response.

• "That is to be taken metaphorically." - I find it ironic that a joke can be used to debunk your comeback... Here's the snippet (full version): " When Jesus broke the bread at the last supper, he said, 'Take this and eat it, for it is my body.' He did not say 'Eat me'." If Jesus had the nature of God, and Jesus was metaphorical here, couldn't God be metaphorical? And if we are derived from God, and we can be poetic, doesn't that mean that God can be poetic? Heck, there's a part I'm thinking of where God is being sarcastic. (It's something like "Go on, sin with all your might", when Israel is being unfaithful and seemingly oblivious to God)
  
• "There was more there than...." - I have no fucking idea what you're talking about. Also, a good Christian will not add to verses.
  
• "It has to be understood in context." - Two wrongs don't make a right.
  
• "There was just a copying/writing error." - The only thing that God explicitly wrote was the Ten Commandments, and that was on a couple of stone tablets. Well, he wrote them twice, as the first pair were broken.
  
• "That is a miracle." - Miracles don't have to be "physically possible".
  
• "God works in mysterious ways." - God doesn't do the same shit every time.
  

5. "The only rational viewpoint is Atheism."
Bullshit. Also, what about Agnosticism? (Hopefully I have the right "video" there.) Heck, you could even look into Bhuddism; I hear they teach religious tolerance. Which is something you quite clearly don't have.

6. "The Bible is out of date."
That's what Israel must have thought before God sent them into exile, as they were worshipping idols ("This stick is your god"), but some were also making a half-assed effort towards God. Which, ironically, was very retrospective. While there are old laws in there which serve no purpose in today's society, they aren't the main point of the Bible.

I'll tell you what's out of date. Darwin's "The Origin of the Species" is out of date.

7. "Christianity is basically saying, 'Follow me or you will be damned.'"
No, it's saying, "Follow me and you will be saved." If Hell is a metaphor for nothingness, then this is supplying an alternative.

8. "Well, the Bible can be interpreted in so many ways."
Some bits can, some bits can't. This is more of a comeback when someone brings something like this up. Well...

"Circumcision on the eighth day is ideal (Genesis 17:12; Leviticus 12:3; Luke 1:59). Medical science has discovered that the blood clotting chemical prothrombin peaks in a newborn on the eighth day. This is therefore the safest day to circumcise a baby. How did Moses know?!"

This is a custom. It's not a matter of interpretation. It's a matter of association.

9. "Evolution has survived the test of time."
150 years. While being changed, of course. DNA, as we know it today, was discovered in 1953 [citation given], which would make that about 55 years. And how long has the Bible lasted? Thousands. Yet people still believe it.

10. "<INSERT CANNED RESPONSE HERE>"
"You will find yourself wrong on some things and right on some things, but, please, in the process, don’t be arrogant." -- Ted Haggard, whilist having to suffer the terrible fate of being in the same room as Richard Dawkins.

11. "You should be nice to Atheists, and encourage them."
No, I should not. See point #5, and harden the fuck up.

12. "Don't mix religion with science."
Is this your half-assed way of attempting to disintegrate religion? Christianity, according to the Bible, should be commonplace. Also, what if all your science points to God? Then what are you going to do?

------------------------------------------------------------

I deliberately decided not to elaborate on point #1, just like the people who fit under this category deliberately decided not to elaborate on why they think there is no God.

Now, I will propose my argument.

What do you benefit from Atheism? The only "benefit" is the "assurance" that you can do whatever the fuck you like.

Sorry, but life doesn't work that way, sweetie. You're actually going to have to work with others, people who you may or may not agree with. My advice is, for at least one day, stop reading blogs and actually go for a ride on your bike. Don't have one? Take a walk instead. They're both good for you.

Yes, of course you're familiar with the concept of "you". But what about the concept of "other people"? How far are you willing to go for others?

Of course, I'm not saying that you should try to please everyone - you can't.

With a moral code, everything works a lot better, unlike what Richard bloody Dawkins says. Richard "I know everything" Dawkins claims that you can have an Atheistic moral code. But where is the "religious" base for it? The answer: there is no base. Atheism is bland. This breed of Atheism is based around the idea that there was not, is not, and can not be a god, which in my opinion is a pretty pathetic base. Yeah, sure, most Atheists do have a moral code, but it's not a common code, and there's not really a lot behind it.

Everyone has some form of "god". Be it money, be it work, be it friends (that sounds creepy). If you can't think of a god, then chances are it's probably yourself.

If you say that your "god" is "defending Atheism", you're a liar. That's merely a task for defending your selfish lifestyle.

Strangely enough, I am aware of three Atheists' lifestyles and living conditions. In each case, I think, "man, that guy really needs God's help."

Here's a little thing to close the lid on this case. Most of the religious attacks I've come across are about Christianity (although there are quite a few against Islam these days). The way that the other parties attack Christianity seem to lead towards the idea that there is a Devil. And my duty as a Christian is not only to follow God, but to disappoint the Devil in doing so. The Devil wants us to believe that there is no God, so I'm going to disappoint the Devil by saying that if there is a Devil, then there is a God.

Here's my logic:

• My duty as a Christian is to follow God.
• The Devil is the enemy of God.
• Therefore, I must work against the Devil.
• In doing so, the Devil is wanting me to turn away from God.
• One of the methods that the Devil uses is to make us think that there is no God.
  
• Therefore, to deadlock the Devil's argument, I am willing to say that if there is a Devil, then there is a God.

While it may not be the prettiest argument, it does help.

And that's my message.

If you would like to object to the profanity I have used, then I may have no choice but to work on one of the drafts I have, entitled: "dont sware: I'm so fucking sorry.

Shakespeare: You can lead a horse to water...

There was an article in the paper a few weeks or so ago, about how NZQA and/or the government are attempting to make alternative papers to the Shakespeare paper taken at NCEA level 3. Now, I reckon that this is a brilliant idea; if someone were taking English at that level, and found Shakespeare to be irrelevant for their job, then it should be acceptable.

Shakespeare is pretty much only studied today because he was quite clever with his wording, and played around with it. However, since when was the last time you found a job in the paper which required you to do that? And aren't there other writers who do that, but with a version of English which people actually speak? And if you were willing to be a writer, are you sure you're going to need to do Shakespeare exactly?

So, I think that supplying an alternative to this paper is a brilliant idea, as NCEA is mainly oriented around showing your employer what you are able to do. If that were merely a report, I could close this post now.

But it wasn't. The article was about a bunch of senior English teachers who don't like the idea of an alternative, instead doing stuff the same old fucking way and essentially telling their students, "That's what it was like in my day." In other words, "Well, it worked for me." Great, let's bring back School C's subsidised grading! And if any year group makes a vast improvement, they'll still get a bunch of Ds! Yeah! Let's do that!

The "well, it worked for me" excuse sucks. It hardly even counts as an excuse. Have a look at some of the inventions you see around you. I mean, before the printing press, writing hundreds of copies by hand "worked for me". And don't get me started on the Internet. There's a lot of work put into there. And what about before Shakespeare? What did Shakespeare study?

Here's what I think about English. It has the potential to be a good subject, and I can see the potential there. However, the examiners have made a good job at being lazy and making students write yet another fucking essay, instead of actually telling them what they're looking for. Actually, let's make an acronym out of that: YAFE. Because that's what English is pretty much about these days.

If you want me to write my opinion on a topic, I can quite happily do that; in fact, I am doing it right now, although not in the standardationalisismed essay format. But if you want me to write some crap about what I thought about the language used in a book which I really don't give a rat's ass about, forget it. Take this test paper and shove it up your ass. Oh wait, you printed three of them. Having fun, dear? Are You Okay, Dear? Would You Like Me To Get You Something, Dear?

And now we return back to the topic, so you don't have to hear a rant about bananas. While Shakespeare was a very skilled writer, his plays were written to be performed. And there's one place for Shakespeare's plays: drama. If you really can't get enough Shakespeare, go and teach drama.

I am aware that Shakespeare wrote about 150 sonnets, but quite clearly I don't give a flying fuck about any of them. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. I, for one, have not felt the need for Shakespeare in my life outside of drama and English, and almost my entire life is out of English; in fact, I'm learning a few other languages. [なんでやねん] といっている?

(note: if you see a whole bunch of question marks there, go get yourself some Japanese fonts and make the world a better place.)

Honestly, why can't you deal with a little bit of change? And even then, they're not disposing of anything. It's people like you who bore the fuck out of students like me (although I'm signing out on Thursday, so no more school \o/). And heck, it's not like they're offering a 10-credit unit standard for showing up to class 5 days in a row.

Yes, that is an actual paper, although I'm not sure about how many credits it's worth. It's also what I would call a complete fucking disgrace. Like English. Except around the other way.

Wow, what a rant. By the way, seeing as that species of English teacher appears to hate bullet points and irrelevant crap, I'll list the languages I'm attempting to learn:

• Japanese - I have been learning this for 5 years. I need to learn more vocabulary if I'm to continue with this. Sadly, I may not touch this again.
  
• Spanish - Currently on hold. Again, vocabulary is an issue.
• German - My current project. I'm actually writing stuff down this time. Wie geht's?

And that will be me for now. As for now, I conclude: Out, damned Shakespeare!

x86-64: A hack of a hack of a hack of a hack of a hack of a hack.

x86-64 (i.e. probably your pre-watered idea of a 64-bit CPU) is a hack of a hack (i386) of a hack (80286) of a hack (8086) of a hack (8080) of a hack (4040/4004). I'm quite suprised the whole bloody thing hasn't fallen apart already. While the thing about the 8086 being based on the 8080 isn't exactly true as they are incompatible with each other, and likewise the 4040 and the 4004, they are still hacks.

OK, now we start with 8086, as I know fuck-all about the ones before that, as there is fuck-all information about them, and I can't read the circuit diagram for the 4004. Here we have something from IRC:

<@Spaz> GreaseMonkey, you know why IBM adopted x86 right?
<@GreaseMonkey> Spaz: nope
<@GreaseMonkey> was it the only thing around?
<@Spaz> GreaseMonkey, two things, (1. it was cheap, (2. it wouldn't compete with their servers
<@Spaz> since they knew it was such shit

(x86 is what they call the whole architecture nowadays.)
Oh yeah, just before I continue, some legalese:

<@Spaz> GreaseMonkey, all my quotations are 2-clause BSD licenced

So, this is where I think, "I love open source", and print the whole fucking license:

Copyright (c) 2008, Spaz
All rights reserved.

Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:
* Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
* Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.

THIS QUOTE IS PROVIDED BY SPAZ ''AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL SPAZ BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS QUOTE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

At least it's a lot smaller than the EULA or the GPL. Anyway, moving on...

So, the 8086 was a cheap piece of shit which would be suitable for people who couldn't afford a blazing rocket of a machine. Unfortunately, there was no memory protection, and also you could only access 1MB of memory, AND due to architecture limitations that was shrunk down to 640KB (which, of course, is enough for anybody), so then we progress towards...

... the 80286. It could access a whole 16MB! Wow! On top of that, you had up to 4 levels of security! However, there were several catches with this:

• It still followed the segmented memory model. Under this, you could still only access 64KB in a segment. The same limit was imposed on the 80286.
• Instead of having 65536 unique segments, that was dropped down to 8192 in the Global Descriptor Table (GDT), not including TSS entries, LDT pointers, or call/task gates. The Local Descriptor Table (LDT) would allow another 8192 segments, also not including TSS entries or call/task gates. Why? Because part of the code segment is used for determining the privilege level of your code.
  
• There were "code segments" and "data segments". You could only run code in a code segment, and optionally read it. As for a data segment, you could not. You could read it, and optionally write to it. While this did offer another form of memory protection, I have yet to see anyone actually take advantage of this, instead of making identically sized and located pairs of code and data segments.
  
• To use the memory protection, you would have to put stuff into a Task State Segment (TSS), even if you do not want to use hardware task switching. Which is what the TSS was for. There were a few necessary fields you would have to fill in so, in case of any interruption (which actually happened many times in a second), it could enter a higher privilege level.
  
• Most people would only use 2 levels of security: kernel mode and user mode. For example, Microsoft. In fact, they still do this, even with Vi$ta. Not only that, but the 80286 came out when DOS was still king, and people who code for DOS generally don't use memory protection. So, the security levels weren't really used a lot.
• To enter protected mode, you had to set up a GDT, enable a flag, set all your segments to appropriate settings, then do a jump to another segment.
• To exit protected mode, you had to reset the CPU.
  

Then came the 80386. They managed to fix a few things. Firstly, you could access up to 4GB of memory. Secondly, you could actually exit protected mode without resetting your CPU. Thirdly, you could access all 4GB of memory without having to make a buttload of segments.

And they did a few other things, too. Firstly, everything was 32-bit, instead of 16-bit like the last two processors. (The 8080, if I'm correct, is 8-bit.) This meant that you could work with bigger numbers, read and write memory faster, and pretend you're awesome. Secondly, they introduced paging (better known as virtual memory), which allowed you to relocate memory, and get an extra method of protection. Thirdly, it supported hardware debugging, allowing you to "trap" something when it reads, writes, or executes a part of memory, and makes it an absolute joy for hacking games and making cheats for them.

When paging first came out, you had two levels of tables. You had the first level, which was 4KB in size. This pointed to 1024 second level tables, which were also 4KB in size. Each of the 1024 told the CPU where to actually look when something wanted to access a part of memory. Each page was 4KB in size, just in case you were wondering.

Sounds too good to be true? Well, it's not as good as it sounds.

• If you wanted to page every single piece of memory, you'd use up 4100KB, which is just over 4MB, just for the page tables. While you don't have to complete the whole thing, it's easier if you do, but most computers back in that day could do a heck of a lot more with an extra 4MB. Although overlap hackery could work. But still...
  
• If you decided not to page a secondary table, you could save 4KB, but then you'd lose a whole 4MB of virtual memory space.
• You can mark pages as either User or Supervisor. Unfortunately, the way that this was designed was that only the lowest security level would be affected, hence rendering two of the security levels rather pointless.
• The architecture was still quite dependent on the BIOS for several services. Now, the floppy disk controller is a fucking nightmare to code for if you're doing it without using the BIOS services, so generally it's easier to just use the BIOS services. Most video cards have VESA support, but until VESA 3.0 came out, you still had to use the BIOS services. Problem? The BIOS was 16-bit. You had to use a new mode, called Virtual-8086 mode, to do this.
• Virtual-8086 mode relied on the TSS. Dammit.
  
• Virtual-8086 mode relied heavily on catching a whole bunch of instructions that it wasn't supposed to run, which you would then have to emulate. Unfortunately, there are several pre-flags you have to catch, and there are about 6 opcodes on their own related to IN and OUT, never mind the pre-flags.
• Thanks to the extensions of the architecture, it is now a complete fucking mess when it comes to 16-bit code and 32-bit code. It reuses 16-bit opcodes and makes 32-bit versions out of them, unless you put a pre-flag in.
• One of the registers, CR1, was marked as reserved. It has never, ever, ever been touched.
  

The 80386 has gone through different extensions. Here's what I could find off the top of my head...

• Page Address Extension (PAE): This allowed you to access up to 64GB. Four problems: it's buggy, it uses 3 levels of paging (taking up even more memory), no-one implements it without any compatibility issues, and you need paging enabled to access it.
• Page Size Extension (PSE): This allowed you to use 4MB pages, and save an extra 4KB on making another table. This also relies on paging.
• PSE-36: Like above, but allowed you to access up to 64GB without using PAE.
• System Management Mode (SMM): A complete fucking nightmare. Only the hacker underground uses it to its full potential, and that's to install rootkits. Introduced with the 386SL. Fuck the 386SL.
  
• MMX, SSE and the like: I've never used them. Apparently they're used to allow you to calculate lots of things at once. Apparently they work well.
• No eXecute bit (NX): Yay. You can finally stop people from executing certain pages.
  

After a while, it gets fairly clear: the x86 architecture is a little too clunky, yet a little too restricted. So, what do we do?

Intel had an idea: IA-64. Pretty much an entirely different architecture, starting as an x86 core, but can be transferred to IA-64. Unfortunately, it's not x86, so it hasn't been successful.

So, they decide to go with AMD's slightly older idea: x86-64 (originally AMD64 if I recall correctly). What do they do?

• They remove the need for the GDT, instead relying on paging (we're up to 4 levels of paging now). There's no segmentation, either. I'm not sure how they handle privilege levels.
  
• They allow you to access up to 256TB (262144GB) of memory. What? Shouldn't that be higher? Well, yes, they've got plans for allowing 64PB (65536TB), but if you had a 64-bit address space, you'd probably want to support 16EB (16386PB).

But, of course:

• They add yet another fucking instruction set to the x86 architecture.

HOW MANY FUCKING INSTRUCTION SETS DO WE NEED?!?!?!?!

Not only that, but x86-64 is suffering badly from compatibility, having to support 8086, 80286, and 80386 apps!

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

What. A. Nightmare.

Fortunately, there are other processors out there. There's the ARM processor, for one. And then there's my personal favourite, the MIPS, which has gone through at least 4 backwards compatible versions, was the fastest damn thing you could get, is nice and simple, and has a few really really nifty features to it. This just makes me want a computer with a MIPS in it.

It's such a pity that the most common desktop processor is a flaming pile of dogshit. We need something better. In fact, the whole bloody architecture is a mess.

Cybersquatting: I know what I need, and I don't need your crap.

Yay, I've created a blogspot site. Last night, I checked to see if bluntknife was available, and... it wasn't. It was used to advertise some stupid I.T. company which nobody seems to care about. Now, I was looking for somewhere I could ask for that address, as advertising things which nobody cares about is not only a violation of the terms of service, but is also a violation of the fundamental principle of social life, which is "Don't be a dick". So, that gave me a brilliant idea for my first rant.

Now, I normally go by the alias "GreaseMonkey". (Yes, I do have that Firefox plugin installed. Yes, it's a good plugin.) So, I was wondering if greasemonkey.org was available. What do I get?

A search engine called "What you need, when you need it."

No, I didn't want a fucking search engine, thank you very much, and certainly not now. If I wanted a search engine, I would have opened up Google.

This one particular "search engine" crops up a lot, and when you definitely don't need it. I tried greasemonkey.org recently, and it no longer has that. Instead, it has a list of links which nobody cares about. Did they realise that it was false advertising?

No, they did not. Try wikpedia.com. Yep, "What you need, when you need it". Actually, don't go there; they may drop a drive-by download in after I post this.

It appears to be owned by "information.com". Do you see Google doing that sort of crap? No, you do not. Why not? Because Google doesn't need to. These guys need to do this sort of bullshit just so people notice them. It means that they suck.

Now, here's the "Related searches" list:
* Free Online Encyclopedia
* Free Credit Report
* People Search
* Wikipedia Encyclopedia (this one was really big - I wonder why?)
* Criminal Background Check
* Background Check
* Find People
* Car Insurance
* Criminal Records

Yes, like I'd *really* search Wikipedia for a free credit report.

So, I'm going to analyse this list:
Free Online Encyclopedia - Wow. You were actually even close to being right.
Free Credit Report - I'm fine, thanks. My piggy bank works well.
People Search - Great, now these scammers can find out who my family is and kidnap them. What a great way to make revenue!
Wikipedia Encyclopedia - Thanks for correcting my spelling. I'll type in wikipedia.com next time (it's .org, btw, but .com redirects).
Criminal Background Check - Wow, a search engine catering for its employers!
Background Check - See above.
Find People - See further above.
Car Insurance - You'll need this if they find your number plate.
Criminal Records - See above. Again.

Let's click on one of those, shall we?

I have removed the URLs. Yes, I do live in New Zealand; at least that's one thing they can get right.

Sponsored Listings:
Financial Freedom - Make Money From Home Online Op For Motivated Individuals
Molluscum Contagiosum - It Started With One Red Bump. Then The One Became 20. It's Spreading.
"how To Lose Stomach Fat" - Finally, A Diet That Really Works! As Seen On CNN, NBC, CBS & Fox News
Multi Level Marketing - Secrets about multi level marketing your upline won't tell you!
Father Of 4 Makes It Big - A $250K 1st Year Income Potential Using A Simple 3 Step System
Kiwi Family Find Freedom - Create Success Working From Home. $250K+pa Potential. Find Out How...

OK, so we can learn a few things from here:
1. Capitalising All Words Is A Sure Fire Way To Make Your Customers Actually Give A Crap.
2. Especially With An Exclamation Mark On The End!
3. People go to Wikipedia, "the free encyclopedia", because they want to make money, lose weight, and get nasty infections.

Whatever you do, don't click any of the links, because last time I did that, I didn't turn off javascript, and so I got a porno popup. Oh, here's another thing:
4. Everyone uses search engines for porn.
That one is partially true, just not the "everyone" bit.

Alright then, let's do a search. I'm going to try two things: "walgreens" (even though there isn't a Walgreens in New Zealand), and "answer man" (from Comedy Inc, an Australian TV show).

Here's "Walgreens". I can't be arsed formatting any more.
Sponsored Listings
Pharmacies Your Guide to local Pharmacies. Just Go Yellow! <-- yellow pages. appropriate. but there's no walgreens in NZ.
Drug Store - Nz Find a pharmacy in your area with the finda Business Directory. <-- ditto. congradulations, mister research.
-------------------- (yes, there is a line here)
Looking For Walgreens? Find all of the best sites for walgreens. We have everything you need to know about walgreens. <-- uhuh. this is "look".
Walgreens Looking for walgreens? Find the top sites for walgreens today. <-- yeah. this is "searchexplorer." like that's going to work.
Walgreens In Encyclopedia Check Free Online Encyclopedia for information about walgreens. <-- yeap. this is "thefreedictionary". it's definately a word shakespeare would have used.

WebSearch Results
Walgreens.com - Online Pharmacy & Drugstore, Prescription... Walgreens.com - America's online pharmacy serving your needs for health & wellness products <-- wow. this is the actual website.
Red Streak- Chicago Sun-times HOME | NEWS | MONEY | SPORTS | ENTERTAINMENT | FEATURES | SCURRILOUS RED STREAK PERSONALS Meet someo... <-- what. the. fuck.

Right now, you're probably thinking, "Wow. These guys haven't got a fucking clue." In your own words, of course.

Now for "answer man".
Sponsored Listings
Find Yourself A Woman Immediate Contact with hot Ladies No Registration, free Access now! <-- he had a sex change?
answer Services 24hrs / 7day’s - New Zealand Call Answering and Telemarketing <-- hey guys, there's an idea for you.
New Zealand Site Features 130,000 Members. Discover Why It's So Popular! <-- this is "smilecity", it is actually a proper website.
answer Man Buy Answer Man Australia's leading online stores <-- wow, answer man has merchandise? cool!

Considering that cybersquatting is illegal, these domains should be freeable for anyone who is willing to file a complaint to the correct authorities. Start with rebel.com, they're the ones who take care of the domain. If that doesn't work, go to internic.net. They own the .com, .org, and .net ranges. Finally, try ARPA, or FCC; they may be the ones you need to deal with. If they don't do anything, then I'm terribly sorry. I highly recommend that you just print the page, then take a lighter to it, and burn it, all the while playing "Disco Inferno" (by The Trammps, if you're curious).

Finally, here's the actual Wikipedia article on cybersquatting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybersquatting

Enjoy.