Egregoros

@wishgranter14 @mushroom_soup You're "supposed" to, because if your computer has Internet access, it can technically be comprimised and anything on there can be viewed.
So imagine, if you have a little notepad file that says "my passwords" and somebody opens it, they have all your passwords by simply copying and pasting it back to their own unit.

Now imagine, instead, you've written everything down physically. There's no chance any kind of hacker can access it, unless they figure out a way to control your life-sized ona-hole sexbot and make her go fetch your physical password notebook and scan it somehow.

Both ways have pros and cons, but that's life for you.

@mushroom_soup @takao
Yes and no.
It can be almost as secure as a password manager.
There are pro an cons to it.
Just like a password manager the user must know how to apply proper practice.
If the password put in it are the same everywhere or dictionary vulnerable it doesn't change the issue.
The main password of a password manager must be strong and be known by memory for it to be strong to theft/copy attacks.
The paper password manager must never be lost, or be written in cryptic details understood only by it's owner.
Strong passwords are less random if done by human mind than by either an algo or radio isotopic disintegration (there's a proper radioactive element that has the most randomness but I can't recall which it is).

Paper password manager is only good for beginners.
It does not protect against physical theft.
It does not protect against a compromised machine.
Note: that a password manager is protected to some level of compromised machines.
Ideally you want you password manager to have 2FA via a nitro key or keyfile on a optical disc.