D Hilberg wrote:
Anyone who still uses numerical methods to generate random
numbers is living in a state of sin.
[....]
(Have you tried measuring the decay of a radioactive element?)

At the risk of giving credance to what might have been
intended as levity ....

Yes, there are hardware-based RNGs. These are becoming
common-place on "mainframes" (technical computers). They
might be available as add-ons for PCs. I did not think
they are commonly built into PCs, though. Are they?

In any case, the OP asked about a seeded RNG. By
definition, a seeded RNG is deterministic (repeatable),
not "random" at all (although we hope a large sampling
has the appearance of "randomness"). And whether you
rely hardware or software, the first number of a seeded
RNG will depend on the seed, by definition.

The purpose of my posting was to provide a basic
understanding of seeded RNGs so that the OP could
understand why the first number in a small sampling
__might__ "always" be the smallest value, without the
illusion of a defect. And in fact, my point was: it
will __not__ always be the smallest, if you choose
either the seed or the sample size appropriately.