| bio | website | balpha.de |
|---|---|---|
| location | Berlin, Germany | |
| age | 32 | |
| visits | member for | 2 years, 10 months |
| seen | May 21 at 11:09 | |
| stats | profile views | 265 |
My name is Benjamin Dumke-von der Ehe. I am Stack Overflow Valued Associate #00007, which is just a confusing way of saying that I work as a developer for Stack Exchange.
I am @balpha on Twitter. My blog's "about" page explains the origin of my user name.
I am the creator of Unicornify, the service that gives you these lovable creatures:
I also created Lyfe, a small library adding yield-based generators to JavaScript, and Not a Real Question, a little game that's played with data from various Stack Exchange sites.
I sometimes have a strange sense of humor, but I also like to explain things I fix, break, care about, or come up with.
|
Jul 2 |
awarded | Excavator |
|
Jul 2 |
revised |
Chance of getting a date work around mathjax bug |
|
Jun 8 |
awarded | Constituent |
|
Apr 13 |
awarded | Convention |
|
Aug 8 |
awarded | Good Answer |
|
Jul 21 |
awarded | Yearling |
|
Jul 12 |
comment |
A property of subsets of topological spaces Interesting, in that case I'll have to check my original proof for errors. My topology has become quite rusty, so give my some time :) |
|
Jul 10 |
awarded | Announcer |
|
May 17 |
awarded | Quorum |
|
Mar 12 |
revised |
A property of subsets of topological spaces typo |
|
Mar 12 |
comment |
A property of subsets of topological spaces @S.L. I expanded my question with some context. |
|
Mar 12 |
revised |
A property of subsets of topological spaces clarify Lebesgue condition |
|
Mar 12 |
awarded | Nice Question |
|
Mar 12 |
revised |
A property of subsets of topological spaces add some additional information |
|
Mar 8 |
comment |
Factorial of 0 - a convenience? I've always felt comfortable with $0!=1$, because $(n-1)!=\frac{n!}{n}$ |
|
Mar 8 |
comment |
A property of subsets of topological spaces @S.L.: Requiring this property of the set of $X$'s isolated points in addition to $X$ satisifying the Lebesgue condition is necessary and sufficient for compactness; that was the reason for defining it. I'm just not sure if this fact is interesting at all; hence the question. |
|
Mar 8 |
awarded | Promoter |
|
Mar 6 |
comment |
A property of subsets of topological spaces @HennoBrandsma: Actually, "empty interior" is sufficient -- $Y\setminus N$ needs to be finite, not necessarily $X\setminus N$. |
|
Mar 6 |
awarded | Commentator |
|
Mar 6 |
comment |
A property of subsets of topological spaces @HennoBrandsma: Yes; indeed I used that as an example to show that in general, "relatively finite" sets need not be countable. |