Definitely a good exercise in general, but "better and safer" are hugely debatable points and require context. Most obviously, it's not "better" because the dude's goal is to squat his bodyweight. Switching to split squats instead of fixing his squat technique is the wrong call.
"Safer" is, again, a point out of context. The guy hasn't said he has pre-existing knee or back issues, so there's no real reason to prefer a unilateral exercise over a properly performed back squat.
I took a look on Youtube. Sorry, but I'm not watching an hour and a half video from someone who thinks squats "put all that weight on your spinal discs." A properly performed squat distributes the weight along the support structures of the entire posterior chain, from the traps to the calves. Saying they "load the discs" is a strawman argument.
Also, his form demonstrating hip belt squats would shred my knees more than a good barbell squat would. So, no thanks.
This is like me saying "I got sick from food, so you shouldn't have food." It's, at best, only part of the story. Full story being, for breakfast I had a sack of 10 White Castle sliders, a large fry, and two large onion rings. But hey, blanket statements sound catchy.
"Getting hurt" doing squats is almost-always from some combination of: poor technique, too much weight, too much volume, and/or a pre-existing condition that was exacerbated by the exercise.
For building muscle, that's one opinion. But when the goal is building maximal strength, which this guy is trying to do, it's terrible advice.
Not sure if serious. But this debate has been had many times over, on the forum and in articles. Two different exercises for two different purposes, like barbell rows and pulldowns.