1. I think it's great that someone is revisiting an answer that we have all taken as a given- the conventional feed mechanism is the way to go for a small autopistol. It may well prove that this is another evolutionary dead end- but it may not. Great ideas are great ideas because they depart from conventional thinking.
2. As to this being needlessly complex, perhaps. If it works no better than a conventional feed system, you're adding a lot of complexity to achieve a small increase in barrel length. This assumes that it does not work better, in practice, than a conventional feed system. I think this has the potential to work quite a bit better than your standard feed system...but since you're adding complexity, it could also work quite a bit worse. The only way to know for sure is to build it and see how it works.
Besides, if sheer simplicty was the final answer, we'd all be arguing "what size rock for pocket carry?"
3. I don't get the accessory rail hate. It adds, at most, a few grams to the nose of the gun, no size, costs very little, and allows you to put a laser or light there (if they ever make lights small enough) if you want to, and also allows you do just leave it alone if you don't.
4. "The added barrel doesn't increase sight radius." No. Making the gun bigger increases sight radius. That's the opposite of what he's trying to do. Making the barrel longer does increase velocity, though, and when you're talking "pocket pistol", you want every last FPS you can get.
One thing that does give me pause...how do you clear jams? What happens if the round-puller-thingy grabs a round, pulls it halfway out of the mag, and loses its grip? What's the malfunction drill?
Mike