filters: fix container!=new and pid!=new filter parsing

[yanivagman]

Fix BoolFilter.Parse() to use 'not-new' instead of '!new'. The '!' prefix is not recognized by BoolFilter, causing these filters to incorrectly match new containers/processes instead of excluding them.

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

This PR fixes a bug in the parsing of container and process filters where the !=new operator was incorrectly using !new syntax, which is not recognized by BoolFilter.Parse(). The fix changes these to use the correct not-new syntax to properly exclude new containers and processes.

Key Changes

• Updated NewContFilter.Parse() call to use "not-new" instead of "!new"
• Updated NewPidFilter.Parse() call to use "not-new" instead of "!new"

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
⚠️ Please upload report for BASE (main@e4492f4). Learn more about missing BASE report.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
pkg/cmd/flags/policy.go	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

❌ Your patch check has failed because the patch coverage (0.00%) is below the target coverage (60.00%). You can increase the patch coverage or adjust the target coverage.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #5009   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage        ?   29.71%           
=======================================
  Files           ?      234           
  Lines           ?    26180           
  Branches        ?        0           
=======================================
  Hits            ?     7780           
  Misses          ?    17861           
  Partials        ?      539           

Flag	Coverage Δ
unit	29.71% <0.00%> (?)

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
pkg/cmd/flags/policy.go	68.93% <0.00%> (ø)

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[josedonizetti]

@yanivagman I don't mind merging this as is. Though, can we in a follow up PR add tests case to cover not new? Thanks

btw, if you short on time, I can do a PR for it myself, let me know