Some of those are pretty valid criticisms, actually, not just "internet rage". Others less so.
I mean, let's quickly go through them:
1) Dinosaurs - Semi-valid. It's a fair criticism, but it's not completely accurate.
2) Complexity - Valid and not valid - much of the game has entirely appropriate complexity. Sometimes it's bloody stupid, like the chunky salsa rules. They're just bad rules, straight up, and should definitely be mocked. So he's kind of right.
3) Redundant - Kind of the same point as 1 & 2, here, but yeah, SR5 has a bunch of redundant or useless rules that add to the word count.
4) Math - Similar point to 1, 2, 3, but yes, some of the rules in SR5 are fiddly and not well-designed. Recoil definitely fits that profile, especially because it only affects some weapons, and thus wastes a lot more of some people's time than others. I mean, is this a game about shadowrunning, or is it some kind of Millenium's Edge-esque shooting-simulator? The recoil rules are overcomplicated for the former and inadequate for the latter, and seem really fiddly.
5) Counteract - Not a valid criticism, imho.
6) Dead Man's Trigger - He is 150% correct here. Like, he could not be more right. Dead Man's Trigger is an astonishingly bad piece of design, nitpicky and dumb. It shouldn't require a test and shouldn't require initiative.
7) Wall of Data - Semi-correct. There are a lot of walls of data in SR5.
Er... he only has 7, hmm.
His final complaint, that you need years of experience, is not true, though.
So it's an okay complaint, and not all wrong, but there are a lot of valid complaints he misses (like terrible writing, tons of errors), and he repeats himself an awful lot.