  The basic problem in the PAC model of computational learning theory is to
determine which hypothesis classes are efficiently learnable. There is
presently a dearth of results showing hardness of learning problems. Moreover,
the existing lower bounds fall short of the best known algorithms.
  The biggest challenge in proving complexity results is to establish hardness
of {\em improper learning} (a.k.a. representation independent learning).The
difficulty in proving lower bounds for improper learning is that the standard
reductions from $\mathbf{NP}$-hard problems do not seem to apply in this
context. There is essentially only one known approach to proving lower bounds
on improper learning. It was initiated in (Kearns and Valiant 89) and relies on
cryptographic assumptions.
  We introduce a new technique for proving hardness of improper learning, based
on reductions from problems that are hard on average. We put forward a (fairly
strong) generalization of Feige's assumption (Feige 02) about the complexity of
refuting random constraint satisfaction problems. Combining this assumption
with our new technique yields far reaching implications. In particular,
  1. Learning $\mathrm{DNF}$'s is hard.
  2. Agnostically learning halfspaces with a constant approximation ratio is
hard.
  3. Learning an intersection of $\omega(1)$ halfspaces is hard.
