Here's an image I assembled out of a selection of nominal nuclear radiation detectors I found searching AliExpress and Amazon for a few minutes.
They all have something in common, which is that they all have a radiation hazard trefoil on the device. Here we can see a fundamental misunderstanding of the semiotic purpose of the radiation hazard trefoil, which is to indicate the presence of a ionising radiation hazard. More precisely, ISO 361, which defines the radiation trefoil symbol as a standard, states that the symbol "[s]hall be used to signify the actual or potential presence of ionizing radiation […] including gamma and X-rays. alpha and beta particles, high-speed electrons, neutrons, protons and other nuclear particles […]"
The trefoil is not intended to denote a mere thematic relationship between an object and radiation. Rather, it means that the object is (or contains) a potential or actual ionising radiation source. The error committed by these depicted devices is engaging in a sort of action movie logic, as if the device has been put together by a prop department to establish scene using visual shorthand. The problem with this confusion is that using hazard symbology where no hazard exists tends to have the effect of diluting the denotative connection between symbol and hazard. This makes a sort of sense from a Bayesian perspective. Ionising radiation hazards warranting warning signs are rare, but radiation is sensational, resistant to comprehension, its æsthetics archetypal. Sticking a radiation hazard sticker on your lunchbox is cool. The false positive rate is likely to be very high. But it shouldn't be.
The situation with these radiation detectors is actually worse than merely spuriously bearing radiation hazard symbolism. Two of the detectors I found (which appear to be related: likely different revisions or form factors of the same basic design) actually bear the words 'CAUTION IONIZING RADIATION' on their silkscreens:
The most charitable interpretation of this is that a hazard exists if and when you hold the detector near an ionising radiation source, so be careful. A sort of 'safety first (third)' admonition regarding the contingent hazards that one might encounter in the context of using a radiation detector.
This charity should not be entertained.
Every time someone has to bend their mental heuristics about what warning symbols and signs mean represents an externalised normalisation of deviance. In this view, everyone who handles the item—from manufacture to end use—is trained 'ignore that warning, it's not real'. The alternative is to beclown oneself by calling in a radiological incident. You idiot: it was only a sticker.
This doesn't make us safer, and we should expect more from devices nominally intended to keep us safe. But that's not really what $100 radiation detectors listed on AliExpress and Amazon are for, is it? Rather, these devices occupy hyperreal space. You can hold one to your depression glass or brazil nuts and be gratified, but first and foremost they are live action roleplaying accoutrements with functional characteristics.
