By "like Bostrom" I mean: consistently outputs work useful for making decisions affecting global risk.

Most plausible hires are, indeed, not like Bostrom in this respect. My statement does not imply, however, that most academics "care only for status." I only said that their output could be predicted by a simple model of an amoeba seeking status and funding. (One of the major results of the heuristics & biases tradition, and also neuroeconomics, is that we are not Homo Economicus, and thus we cannot infer desires cleanly from behavior or "output".)