A study demonstrates that a language model's memory containing incorrect conclusions is more detrimental than having no memory at all. When models retain stale values while dropping supporting work, they emit confident but wrong answers, whereas empty memories allow for abstention. This phenomenon, termed brittle memory, was observed across seven models where the direction of failure never reversed regardless of task or disposition. The researchers introduced reclaim evaluation to measure correctability by compressing interactions and testing if corrections recover ground truth without using a judge. Results indicate that correctability depends on whether the source information survives compression rather than model capability. A source-first policy, which keeps recomputable sources and drops re-derivable conclusions, restored correctability significantly better than length-matched controls. In chained memory loops, dropped-source errors corrupt downstream steps irreparably, while the proposed fix maintains bounded performance horizons. The findings replicate across three deployed systems and real dialogue data, with a hand-built oracle reaching perfect accuracy.